MEET THE CANDIDATES – right here & now

If you haven’t attended a Meet & Greet… Or attended a Debate…

If you haven’t been paying attention…
IT’S NOT TOO LATE TO HELP YOUR NEIGHBORS
SAVE THE CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD – read this!

All you need to do is… VOTE for 3 Non Incumbents!

- John Heilman, Abbe Land and Lindsey Horvath MUST GO -
As your neighbor (I don’t work for anyone’s campaign), I’m asking you, NO,
I’m BEGGING you… do THIS ONE THING to help us save West Hollywood!

Save West Hollywood from What?

City Council’s Rein of Overdevelopment:
Oversized expensive condos overshadowing our neighborhoods; Eviction of
longtime low & middle income residents; Big business pushing out Mom &
Pops; Loss of affordable housing and economic diversity; Loss of green
space and old growth trees; Parking Hell; Traffic, Traffic and More Traffic.
City’s Council’s Gentrification of the City:
Our traditional adult, LGBT & Russian immigrant centric facilities, activities,
culture and social needs being replaced by more family oriented facilities,
activities and culture; Rebuilding of the City in the Council’s preferred image
- a city they want to live in - with generic condos & high rise development &
luxury living - AND a population of generic people; Nanny State dogma bent
on obliterating our Rock N’ Roll, Live-and-Let-Live, Creative, Diverse City.

I f y ou’ re not conv inced our City has b een hijacked & the 3 I ncum b ents need
to b e d ethroned , NO W… read thes e tw o ey e-op ening LA Weekly articles !
Dethroning West Hollywood’s Martinets – Feb. 17, 2011
West Follywood – April 1, 2010

Read what these Candidates say about getting us back to what

made West Hollywood so special in the first place… Look for the
questions that matter to you… Think carefully… Then VOTE…
by mail or in person on Tuesday, March 8, 2011 to Save Weho!
Thank You, Sheila Lightfoot – Havenhurst Dr. – rdawgone@sbcglobal.net - paid for by: me
- STEVE MARTIN -
-Occupation: Attorney / Family Law Practice
-Part of Grass Roots Movement to Incorporate the City in 1984
-Former Councilmember 1994-2003
-Former President – Stonewall Democratic Club
-Fighting Against the City General Plan’s Height & Density
-Writes a Regular Column in Weho News Tracking Local Issues
-Advocate: Empowering Citizens & Restoring our Urban Village
-Served on Board of Marriage Equality
-Undergraduate Degree from UCLA
-Law Degree from Southwestern University School of Law

- SCOTT SCHMIDT -
-Occupation: Businessman / Community Organizer
-Member, West Hollywood Transportation Commission
-President, RSC Partners Inc.
-Endorsed by ”Milk” screenwriter, Dustin Lance Black
and LA Councilmember, Bill Rosendahl
-Ballot Campaign, Republicans Against 8
-Sponsor, Local Agency Special Tax & Bond Accountability Act
of 2000 (SB 165 - Alarcon and Villaraigosa)
-BS in Foreign Service, Georgetown University (1995)
-MS in International Public Administration, USC (1996)

- MITO AVILES -
-Occupation: Businessman / Entrepreneur
-Owner of a small business that operates in West Hollywood
-Bachelor's of Arts in Political Science / International Affairs
-Fought for workers' rights, renters' rights, and veteran affairs
with Congresswoman Hilda L. Solis, current U.S. Sec of Labor
-Worked with Labor Unions, including SIEU 399 and AFL-CIO
-Worked on campaigns for prominent figures in Labor Movement
including former Northeast LA City Councilor Victor Griego
-Renter in the East Side of West Hollywood

- LUCAS JOHN -
-Occupation: Small business owner
-Entrepreneur
-Activist
 QUESTIONS FOR THE CANDIDATES
1. How do you recommend voting on Measure A? Why?

Steve: Vote No on Measure A! It is a Trojan Horse to allow tall walls on Santa Monica and
Beverly Blvd. where they are currently banned. The City will not see a dime of new
revenue.

Scott: I will vote NO on Measure A. When Measure A tells voters that the money raised
from taxing billboards will go to city services, it doesn't tell you the whole truth. Measure
A lacks financial and performance audits and other accountability measures required of
“special taxes” under state law. I helped Antonio Villaraigosa and Richard Alarcon write
that law, so I take it personally. Regardless of how you vote on Measure A, be sure to
elect a City Council you can trust to put the city’s revenue to its best use.

Mito: I recommend voting No on measure A. It is an attempt by a large billboard

company to increase the areas they can legally place large billboards. The tax increase
promised from this measure is unconstitutional and will be thrown out by California
courts, so voters should not believe that the tax will increase revenue to the city.

Lucas: I am against Measure A. The tax may not be legal in California, and we need to
make sure each new billboard is submitted for approval.

2. Our traffic is horrible & city council is planning more development & density, making it
worse. What would be one of your top priorities re: traffic, pedestrian safety or local
transportation to preserve our neighborhood?

Steve: My top priority is to enact a resident friendly General Plan. The current proposed
General Plan is a developer's dream. We must put a stop to oversized developments that
don't fit within our "Urban Village.” We need to insure that we don't support development
in residential areas in ways that encourage the demolition of rent controlled housing.

Scott: I’d work to do two things to benefit pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. First,
let’s put signals on our crosswalks, especially along the major boulevards. Second, let’s
contract with the City of LA to put our traffic lights on the Signal Sync program. LA can’t
fill a pothole but when they synchronized their streetlights, they cut trip times by 12-14%.

Mito: Unchecked development impacts everything: our traffic, our parking, our safety,
and our sense of community. I believe that every proposed new development should be
evaluated by its aesthetic beauty, its perceived and actual value to our residents and the
environmental impact it has on our community, such as parking, traffic, or safety. I also
think we should reevaluate the General Plan and make sure that the interests and
concerns of our residents are addressed. I think that the current development “bonuses”
simply incentive new development, especially condos, and allow developers to
circumvent our height restrictions.

Lucas: My top priority is REdevelopment - to steer away from NEW developments while
we focus on nourishing our own backyard before we plant new seeds.
3. Under this city council, do you think we’re losing many more affordable units to new
development than the city is creating to replace them? Do you have any ideas to help us get
back to our core value of affordable housing?

Steve: Rather than allow developers to pay a nominal "in lieu" fee to avoid affordable
housing mandates, we must insist that developers build affordable units on site. We need
to move away from large, low income buildings and scatter our affordable units
throughout the City so that we preserve our unique population with its economic diversity.
If we force developers to build on site we will actually gain more affordable units.

Scott: We can’t keep thinking that “density” is the only solution to affordable housing –
especially when the incumbents consider paying over half-a-million dollars per unit to
build affordable housing. Let’s focus on making the existing housing stock affordable so
people who work here can afford to live here. That will build a stronger community and
reduce demands on parking and our city streets… once people can walk to work.

Mito: We are losing our rental units to new condo developers, and the City Council
believes that it is sufficient to simply create more Affordable Housing units. The problem
is that “affordable housing” units are not reserved for West Hollywood residents.
Affordable housing is given to people on a waiting list that includes people throughout the
county. I think we need to provide greater incentives for owners of buildings with rental
units to provide livable-rate rental units.

Lucas: We can't afford to lose apartments & we need to treat apartment buildings like
historical landmarks to preserve the values on which we founded this city.

4. Why has there been such a big surge in demolition of existing rental units for luxury
condos towering above our neighborhoods over the last several years… can it be stopped?

Steve: I have been the leading voice against demolition of rent controlled buildings to
make way for luxury condos. We need to revise local zoning, including a so-called "Green
Building" ordinance, to eliminate incentives that encourage developers to demolish rent
controlled housing. We need to change our zoning codes to mandate solar panels, green
space set asides and adequate parking to insure that if we must have new development
in our neighborhoods, it enhances rather than detracts from our quality of life.

Scott: The irrational exuberance of the housing boom was not limited to Wall Street – it
made its way to West Hollywood and our elected leaders who saw dollar signs in higher
property taxes from million dollar condos. We have to wean ourselves from the need for
more tax revenues, which means getting our budget in balance first, so we can preserve
what’s great about West Hollywood - our diversity, and that includes economic diversity.

Mito: Of course it can be stopped. One problem is: Incentives for developers outweigh
the costs for landlords to own and maintain their rental units. Consequently, landlords
continue to sell rental units to developers who create luxury condos that are empty
because people cannot afford them. We must change the incentives for landlords. I talked
to a landlord who was renting a unit for $160 a month, with a market value over $1,200.
This renter had over $80,000 in the bank. This landlord should either have the rental unit
subsidized, or have a means of challenging this unfair monthly payment. Examples such
as this are pretty common. Also, developers are given “bonuses” that allow them to build
larger developments than would otherwise be permitted. These bonuses create too great
an incentive for developers to buy buildings with rental units, and they must be stopped.

Lucas: This a zoning issue which doesn't require the permission of the council & there is
not much we can do without “rewriting the zoning laws.”

5. With sky rocketing rents and expensive new commercial development, how can we keep
our great Mom & Pop stores and small businesses?

Steve: To help small businesses we must cut red tape and large permit fees we charge
to do business in West Hollywood. We should institute a business license tax holiday for
small businesses.

Scott: The first answer is, don’t demolish the existing commercial spaces to replace
them with higher-priced new development. We also have to remain competitive
compared to our neighbors by keeping our business license tax lower than Los Angeles
and avoiding the temptation of adding a utility users tax. Finally, we must reduce our
reliance on parking tickets as a budget solution so people can actually stop in and drop
by those mom and pop shops.

Mito: We must protect our unique small businesses. With the changes in height
restrictions, we find that developers come in and demolish the buildings that rent to our
amazing small businesses. Our bad economy has contributed to the loss of small
businesses, but there is also the simple fact that development under this current council
is unchecked, and there is little incentive to open a business in a commercial rental unit
that may not exist in a year. - I think we can create a symbiotic relationship between our
large and small businesses. The “urban village” is a reachable goal if we help the flow of
traffic by synchronizing traffic lights, stop approving massive development in congested
areas with insufficient parking structures and facilitate a safe pedestrian community, with
sufficient public transportation, lighting, and law enforcement.

Lucas: We need to do a better job of marketing our city. We also need to reduce the cost
of tickets so that visitors who are being preyed upon by parking enforcement want to
come back and spend their money with us.

6. How do you feel about expensive parking, aggressive enforcement, street parking permits
or our parking problems in general? What significant change would you like to make?

Steve: Our parking enforcement needs to be less aggressive and we need an appeals
process that exists within City Hall so that residents can actually appeal unfair citations.
We need to simplify our postings and regulations so you don't need an attorney to read
our parking enforcement signs.

Scott: Parking enforcement in our neighborhoods is critical to keep the streets available
for people who live here. However, when the meter maid comes to write a ticket for the
Salvation Army truck, as I witnessed today, we’ve gone a bridge too far. As a
Transportation Commissioner, I fought for clearer and more prominent signage at taxi
zones and as a result, cut the number of tickets in half. As Councilman I will resist the
temptation to look at parking tickets as a budget solution.
Mito: The cost of parking is important. If it’s too high, no one would park. If it’s too low,
we will never have an open parking space. We have to find that happy medium, which is
market value. However, I do feel the City has begun to abuse parking tickets as a means
of raising revenue. They are likely to raise over 10 million dollars in revenue from parking
tickets next year. - I think we need to decrease the pace of development while we
increase our parking infrastructure. We simply don’t have the spaces to meet the needs
of the increase in residents, workers and visitors that the new development brings.

Lucas: I would decrease fines & stop towing unless it was truly necessary.

7. What do you think is the WORST city policy for generating revenues and for spending
revenues? How would your priorities be different?

Steve: The worst policy we have at City Hall? Where do we begin. I think the worst
policy is the way we hire consultants for traffic studies and environmental impact reports.
The current crop of insiders who land these contracts know that if they support more
development, they will get more contracts. We need to figure out a new system so we
can restore some integrity to the planning process.

Scott: I believe the Council has shown their priorities on spending by increasing salaries
and fringe benefits by 11% a year over the last decade, while keeping public safety and
social services’ share of the budget steady. I will prioritize public safety and social
services ahead of city hall salaries and pension benefits.

Mito: Unchecked development is the worst policy for generating revenue. In terms of
spending, other than the 54 million dollars of public funds allocated to the development of
the public library, I would say it is government salaries. Government salaries have
skyrocketed, as funding for social services has largely remained the same since the
inception of the city. I would prioritize smart development; and I would prioritize spending
on social services rather than large city employee salaries.

Lucas: I think the worst policy for generating revenue is parking enforcement because
it's hurting residents, visitors and businesses. I think we spend too much on our city hall
employees & we need to bring their pay back to market rates.

8. Re: the new library or any new city projects, how could the process be more inclusive to
let the people decide what projects they want? Should the source of funding and long-term
costs to the taxpayers be disclosed before approval?

Steve: The processes for public input are in place; where the system breaks down is
when you have an arrogant and paternalistic Council Member who thinks only he knows
what is best for those “misguided and ignorant residents.” We don't need a change in the
law - we need a change in the City Council.

Scott: There was much public discussion about the 25th Anniversary Capital Campaign,
but one thing was not discussed - the scale. Between the Library, Plummer Park and the
City Hall Parking Garage, we’re looking at well over $100 million in public projects. We
have drained our reserves - cutting them in half in the last 25 years - so before putting any
more shovels in the ground we must first ask, “can we afford this?” and whether the
money would be better spent on social services or public safety.

Mito: Our city is 1.9 square miles. Of course, we should have input from our community
and this input should not be ignored, as it has been by the current council. I think the
biggest problem is that the current council simply doesn’t care about what the residents
want. They try to avoid confrontation on controversial proposals or they simply go
through the motions of having community input that will not be addressed in city policy. I
believe we need greater transparency in terms of our revenues and expenditures.
Residents should have immediate, online access.

Lucas: We need to foster town hall meetings & create a transparent process for
approving new projects.

9. There has been an increase in serious crime. How can we turn that around?

Steve: We need to constantly have the Sheriff review it's deployment. The Sheriffs
Department seems a bit complacent and spends more time with neighborhood PR rather
than effective enforcement. In 2011, I don't think having a lesbian captain is as important
as having an engaged and effective law enforcement presence.

Scott: The incumbents - John Heilman and Abbe Land - voted for two budgets that cut
funding to public safety and now we see an increase in crime. We must refocus the
priorities at City Hall when we spend our money, and make investments in public safety
and social services.

Mito: Sometimes statistics can be misleading. There has been a “spike” in serious
crime, but from my discussions with deputies, these serious crimes are anomalous. In a
city where violent crime is rare, any violent crime would cause a spike. They do however
believe that the economy has spawned an increase in petty crime. Either way, our citizens
need to feel protected, and we must ensure that we provide sufficient funding and
support to our law enforcement. I would like to see an increase in law enforcement late in
the evening, so we can have safe streets at night and people feel comfortable walking.

Lucas: We need to deploy bicycle police from 1:30 am to 3:00 am.

10. How would you describe the “soul” of the city of West Hollywood? And how can we
preserve it moving into the future while keeping us united as neighbors?

Steve: The soul of West Hollywood is our intelligent, creative and opinionated people.
Our diversity is the basis of our municipal character. The City is encouraging the
demolition of affordable rental housing which has a devastating effect on our economic
diversity, thus adversely impacting the nature of our population.

Scott: The strength of West Hollywood is that we are a place where everyone is
welcome. Our diversity is an asset, not a liability. But if you look at the current City
Council, the incumbents are marching lock-step into this election. You, the voters. can
preserve the soul of the city on March 8. It’s not John Heilman’s city council seat or Abbe
Land’s city council seat - they are your city council seats, and it is time to take them back!
Mito: All residents, business owners, business and historical buildings in the City of
West Hollywood are the true “soul” of the city. Everyone within the city provides and adds
to what makes the city such a great and eclectic place to live and be a part of. They
cannot exist without the other. We need to preserve that soul of the city. With our current
political structure in place, our soul has been dimmed. Residents and business owners
feel that they do not have a voice. They feel that no one is listening to them. We must
restore our voices in the City of West Hollywood. West Hollywood, I hear you and I want
to know what you want our city to bring you.

Lucas: West Hollywood has stifled our artistically inclined soul. We need to refresh the
arts commission with people who are actually in touch with the local & international
artists. I would bring movie nights & jazz festivals to our parks to promote community
gatherings, which will enable us to put the UNITY back into our commUNITY.

11. Would you support instituting regular “town meetings” to give residents a chance to
ask questions of city council members in an open forum?

Steve: I am all for open town meetings; we need something to keep the City Council
plugged into to the pulse of the City.

Scott: We need more openness and transparency at City Hall. I’d like to limit the time
spent on presentations at City Council meetings so the people who come out to speak
have a chance to be heard without waiting two hours. I want to create a legislative history
of ordinances like they do in Sacramento, and if any contract exceeds $10,000, I want it to
have a public hearing at commission or council to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

Mito: Yes I would support this. I would make sure that people felt invited to voice their
opinions personally with government officials. Peoples’ voices are currently ignored.

Lucas: YES!

12. If there is an issue I have missed that you are very passionate about, please feel free
to address it here!

Steve: The issue I feel most passionately about is the empowerment of our residents.
We have abdicated too much control to a handful of Council Members and City
bureaucrats. They are stubbornly clinging to power and they do not respect community
input. Once we can restore a real democracy in West Hollywood, our other problems will
fall into place.

Scott: West Hollywood calls itself the “Creative City,” but there is nothing creative about
recycling the same, old politicians. If you believe it is time for change, ask yourself whom
you can trust to listen to you, to ask questions, and challenge the status quo. I believe I
offer the fresh, new leadership West Hollywood is looking for. If you agree, I ask for your
vote. My name is the first one on your ballot.

Mito: Addressed in previous answers.

Lucas: We don't have a free clinic & I hope to see one here in West Hollywood in the next
four years.