Webslave's note: Each month, back when I lived in Venice, someone from the Beachhead Collective would drop off a bundle of a hundred copies at my door, and I would distribute them house-to-house around Oakwood. My way of continuing to be a Beachhead volunteer is to resurrect and re-type selected articles from its past (pre-computer) issues, for which the Beachhead has graciously granted permission.

Tuum Est: a 70s Program stands up to the 80s
by Beaumarie St. Clair - Dec. 1979

The 1980s loom ahead. Golden years: gold $400.00 an ounce, gold smog belt on the western horizon and gold sun energy alternatives.

The 70s are closing down. Like the boardwalk flea markets and the nomadic sidewalk entertainers, all abandon the chilly seaside to the damp, winter wind.

These days mirror the holidays we are swiftly passing through: savage, Halloween-colored sunsets draw crowds to the shore at dusk. Misty, Thanksgiving-cool mornings make it hard to rise and a Christmas-lit coastline bracelets the night.

These are seasonal changes. For those living at Tuum Est there are more. Standing innocuously between the Figtree Cafe and the Bay Cities Synagogue, 503 Ocean Front Walk's facade looks well kept, but hardly different from the other 1920s-style buildings on the beach.

Inside however, a life-directing force so high in energy is occurring that residents claim one full day in Tuum Est is the equivalent to seven days on the streets. It can be that intense. Nowhere in the community, perhaps the world, do things happen like they do in Tuum Est.

Tuum Est is the formal avant garde of drug abuse treatment. Its goal is the emotional, educational and vocational advancement of drug abusers and alcoholics.

Before the 1970s (except for the wealthy) there were few alternatives for drug users, jails and mental hospitals.

With the rash of drugs that entwined the 60s came a new understanding of the deeper, psychological reasons people abused them. Drug treatment centers rose out of this new awareness.

Tuum Est was instituted in Venice in 1970. Since the beginning of the decade the program has followed a rapid evolution. Early in the 70s the program was geared primarily toward heroin addicts. The hopeless cases with 10, 20, even 25 year old habits came to get help. Many had spent their lives in and out of penitentiaries like San Quentin, Folsom, C.R.C., Chino and Soledad.

These people were the sort of challenge Tuum Est welcomed, and it became the foundation for establishing the program's reputation for being one of the best of its kind in the world.

Tuum Est has grown. It is a dumping place for enormous amounts of human pain, where residents learn and grow. New drug problems (like PCP and cocaine) arise, but the human struggle to endure remains. It is "the people business." A Cinderella story with two possible outcomes, life or death.

With the 80s upon us, so come revisions of codes and regulations. Next year the state will begin licensing drug treatment centers. Despite its sturdy appearance, Tuum Est's building will not meet earthquake and fire safety code requirements.

This means the program is seeking to locate a bigger and better facility in the Santa Monica Bay area. "Tuum Est is an institution in the Venice community," explains Executive Director Jim O'Donnell. "We'd like to remain at the beach."

In regard to the program itself he states, "I think Tuum Est is the essence of where a drug program should be today. We'll continue to add to it to keep it that way."

The golden 80s are upon us and Tuum Est keeps stride.

Skill Center Success Story

Ron Clanin, age 35, is a resident of Venice. He was raised on a midwest farm in Amish Territory, third in a family of six children whose parents did not believe that having an education would "put food on the table." He therefore received only a third grade education. Having previously spent most of his adult life in various drug and alcoholic programs, in 1977 he came to Tuum Est at 503 Ocean Front Walk in Venice. Tuum Est is a therapeutic Community Program for the rehabilitation of alcoholics and drug addicts. After being assisted by Vocational Rehabilitation, he was referred by Tuum Est to Venice Skills Center.

Ron remembers mostly the difficult time he had in meeting the requirements for enrolling, which included verifying his residency. It took approximately three months for preparation before he was actually ready to take the big step toward enrollment. Some of this time included going before the Department of Motor Vehicles to have his driver's license restored after being revoked at age eighteen. It also included going before Performance Review Boards at Tuum Est. One must be reviewed before advancing to any level at Tuum Est.

But, being persistent, sincere in his efforts and honestly desirous of changing his life style, he enrolled in the Auto Mechanics program, completed the training and is now leaving the program to accept employment at Tuum Est as Counselor in Automotive Self Reliance and House Maintenance.

In the 19 months since he entered Tuum Est, he has climbed the ladder of performance from Janitor to Supervisor, to House Manager, and now after completion of training at Venice Skills Center, to employment as Counselor.

His goal is to help some alcoholics and drug addicts regain their sense of composure, obtain a skill, and become self-sufficient. He feels the experiences gathered through his involvement with Tuum Est and Venice Skills Center have provided him with the necessary tools to succeed in this endeavor.

Being the first referral from Tuum Est to complete a training program at Venice Skills Center, Ron hopes that his success can be a bridge between the two programs over which others may be able to follow.

Anyone feeling they have reached a stage in life where they no longer wish to continue downward through unemployment and low self esteem can, by calling Venice Skills Center at 392-4153, become a success as Ron Clanin has become.

CLARE-i-fying the question
by Moe Stavnezer
Free Venice Beachhead June 1980 #126
AND update, exclusive to Virtual Venice, July 2005

To those who know it at all the Clare Foundation is a good group. An alcoholic rehab organization with an office here in Venice, on Lincoln, and headquarters in Santa Monica on Pico Bl. Some, like me, may be most familiar with Clare because it runs the DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) classes required by the S.M. and L.A. courts in lieu of a bigger fine or going to jail. The sell is soft-core by the instructors who are sincere, ex-alcoholics trying to alert the still-drinking population of the evils of demon alcohol. And without any kidding at all there’s a whole lot of evils for us to be concerned about.

But the Clare Foundation is a bit more or should I say less than it appears to be. Recently a series of events have taken place that call into question the squeaky-clean image that Clare has tried so diligently to maintain. Seems that Clare purchased an apartment building on 9th St. in S.M. right behind the main office of the Foundation. Don’t know if Clare did that with the idea of converting the place into an “alcoholic rehab center” right from the beginning but that’s what they claim they want to do now. And in order to do that they have to get rid of the current tenants. And there of course lies the rub. “Cause Santa Monica, as you may recall, has a Rent Control law that requires landlords, no matter who they are, to obtain approval from the Rent Board before removing a rental unit from the market. It also contains a “good cause” eviction section that sets limits on the reasons a landlord may evict a tenant.

Do the Means Justify the Ends?

Clare has applied twice to the Rent Control Board, under different sections of the law, to have the apartments it owns removed from jurisdiction of the law. The first time Clare claimed it was exempt from the law because the apartment was an alcoholic rehab center when that was NOT the case. That application was denied by the Rent Board. Then Clare submitted a removal request which has the effect of removing the units from the jurisdiction of the law and allowing the owner to proceed as if the law didn’t exist. But his portion of the law has very strict criteria and it was obvious that Clare could not meet those standards so that application was withdrawn. So far so good, at least as far as compliance with the law goes. But Clare, it seems, had other ideas that don’t seem to jibe with the law or Clare’s image.

Several tenants in the 6-unit building were told that they had to leave and that Clare Foundation would not accept their rent checks. Other tenants couldn’t pay rents because Clare had failed to designate any particular person to be available to collect rents. When they did not pay rent Clare gave them “e-day notices” to quit or pay rent, a kind of eviction notice that is usually satisfied if the rent is paid. After the tenants were given these notices they again tried to pay their rent. Again the rent was refused by the Clare Foundation employees under instructions from its lawyer. These tenants were then given 30-day notices to leave - for non-payment of rent!

Another tenant, a mother with 5 children, claims to have been given an illegal rent increase as a condition of remaining in her apartment. Because she felt intimidated, she has failed to seek help from the Rent Control Board. Other tenants have filed violation complaints against Clare with the Rent Board.

Ken Shonlau, who runs Clare, denied all of this when I spoke to him on the phone. He claimed, just before having to answer an important long distance call, that Clare tried to help all the tenants find other, comparable housing and that the tenants hadn’t paid rent for a long period before they were served eviction notices (he would not specify the length of time.) Further, he said that none of the violation claims were correct and the Rent Board had not or would not work with Clare to help convert the apartment to an alcoholic rehab center. Clare, according to Shonlau, is completely faultless. It’s the tenants who are all wrong.

But some tenants claim that Clare is much more a landlord than a rehab center. One recovering alcoholic claims to have paid rent to Clare for nearly a year and though grateful for the apartment, says that he has received no counseling during that time. He’s been referred to another agency for help and apart from that his only contact with Clare has been to pay his rent.

Whether Clare Foundation or its tenants are telling the truth will soon be decided by the Rent Board. In the meanwhile I must confess that I’m a bit uneasy about Clare’s position and its real intentions. Part of the Clare credo seems to be being honest, especially with one’s self. Can’t help feeling that the current situation is a “do as I say not as I do” problem for the Foundation and the people who live in that apartment building.

Sunday, July 03, 2005: CLARE, REVISITED
by Moe Stavnezer

It's kind of eerie reading something I wrote 25 years ago. Though what I wrote then was accurate for the context, it is not at all how I feel about the CLARE foundation a quarter century later. CLARE saved my life about 10 years ago and, more than that, has helped saved many others.

The apartment building in question 25 years ago has more than lived up to the to the purpose that CLARE envisioned. I have no idea how many people have benefited from living in that building while recovering from one form of addiction or another, but I was one of them. Some 10 years ago I became addicted to crack cocaine. I found myself in deep trouble with the law and was fortunate enough to be assigned to a rehab program called Drug Court. I was completely broke, in terrible straights and in desperate need of a place to live. I was fortunate enough to be given a place to live at CLARE. Ironically, it was in the very apartment building which was the subject of my earlier article.

CLARE not only administered the Drug Court program but also had a rehab program for the residents. These were rigorous programs, especially since I was going through both simultaneously. CLARE may have side stepped the letter of rent control but certainly not its spirit which was to providing housing for people who could not pay the rising rents in Santa Monica.

I don't know what one person's life is worth. I can tell you that I am alive and living well because of what CLARE gave me.

Playing the Pavilion
by Chris Toussaint

After more than five years of neglect and disuse the Venice Beach Pavilion Theatre is once again gearing up to become an active theatrical house and community arts center. The refurbishment project undertaken by the Venice Beach Foundation comes largely through the efforts of Stephan Tompkins, a long-time Venice resident and director of the current production called "The Lady Who Cried Fox."

The 1250-seat facility was originally an open air amphitheatre which featured the L. A. Philharmonic Orchestra and Shakespearean productions under the "Theatre by the Sea" banner. In 1970 the City of Los Angeles put a roof over it, turning the theatre into a virtual echo chamber. Gutted by vandalism and trashed by derelicts who had made the theatre their home, it was estimated by the City to cost nearly $1 million to renovate.

Tompkins approached the City with a grassroots concept of putting the Pavilion back into business as a community cultural center. Revitalization efforts have so far included a community cleanup crew, a "paint day" which drew local residents to sling paint at the years of accumulated graffiti, and installation of "basics" such as carpeting, new seating, lighting and stage repair.

Tompkins's plans for the Pavilion include eventual full-time use as a community arts center with local theatre presentations, dance, music, art, mime, workshops and classes, and special entertainment events.

"I'm counting on the spirit of Venice to make this work," says Tompkins. The Venice Beach Foundation seeks volunteers and donations of funds and materials to complete the renovation. If you wish to help, contact Mr. Tompkins at 396-9661 or 396-4761 (evenings).

Laundry Cleans Up Act
by Arnold Springer
October 1982 #154

Down on Main Street near the traffic circle, Venice's lone laundromat is being cleaned up and renovated. It's the work of John Stanton. He called the Beachhead and said, "Listen, I want to publicly thank all the friends and neighbors who pitched in and volunteered to help me transform this place from a dirty and disreputable heap into a safe, clean and sanitary community asset."

John was born and raised in Venice, a home boy who attended Beethoven, Mark Twain, and Venice High. He recently bought the laundromat with the double intent of using it to support himself and his recently widowed mother and to clean it up so it could be used by the community. He mortgaged his home and spent his last savings to do it.

When he took over, 8 of the 12 dryers were fritzed, 11 out of the 32 washing machines were zeroed. Local residents donated their labor to help John with his project. They painted, hung doors and built folding tables, pulled an entire dumpster of hair, rags, paper and junk our of the broken washing machines.

The place is now open for business and it has changed. Every washer and dryer has been completely overhauled. An employee (usually John himself) is always on the premises. The machines are cleaned and disinfected after each use, the floors are swept several times a day, and washed and disinfected each night.

Gone are the vagrants and transients who were wont to use the laundromat as a sort of warm waiting room and pissoir. Now 10,000 watts of light, inside and out, add to the security of the establishment and the block surrounding it.

John wants the laundromat to be a neighborhood place, secure and friendly. It was an eyesore and dangerous, he said, and his effort has been as much a social issue as a pursuit of profit. "When I see all the neighbors coming back," he says, "it makes me happy."

The hours for the Venice Laundromat are 6:30 - 10 pm, with the last wash allowed at 9:15. Coffee is served for patrons on Sunday mornings.

May 1983 #161

Family Clinic Benefit:
Take an Art Walk

by Carol Doumani

First, let's clear up a few misconceptions.

The Venice Family Clinic is NOT a shelter for drug users and abusers. Less than 1% of the 10,000 patients seen at the Clinic this year will come in because of problems related to drugs.

The Venice Family Clinic is NOT a shelter for the homeless who populate Venice's beaches and boardwalk. These people could receive medical treatment at the Clinic, but it is not a rescue mission offering food or shelter to people who wander the streets.

The Venice Family Clinic is NOT a family planning center, doling out birth control pills and arranging abortions for women in trouble. Counseling is available to members of both sexes at the Clinic, but it is not the place to come to pick up a monthly supply of contraceptives.

Now, let's talk about what the Venice Family Clinic is.

It IS a full service medical center providing FREE primary medical care to low income residents of the Venice area. This means that anyone who is sick and who cannot afford to pay for expensive private doctors and hospitals has a place to come and get help. For many people, the Venice Family Clinic has been helpful when there has been nowhere else to turn.

Here's how it got started. Twelve years ago a group of local people who cared about Venice got together to discuss a common concern, the lack of available affordable health care for local residents including the elderly, the non-English speaking residents and the very poor, all of whom are part of the melting pot that is Venice. This group wanted to do something tangible to help provide medical services to the community. So, with what government and local funding they could procure, this group of concerned citizens founded the Venice Family Clinic. At first, the Clinic operated only at night, out of a borrowed dental clinic. Supplies and equipment were kept in a few plastic trays, and a closet full of donated drug samples served as a pharmacy. Right from the start there were doctors who were willing to donate some of their precious off hours to work at the Clinic, but in the beginning, "full staffing" meant four evenings a week with one volunteer doctor, a hard-working volunteer pharmacist, one or two largely untrained volunteer assistants, and a part-time receptionist/translator/coordinator. Certainly, it took courage simply to open the door each evening and try to cope with the serious medical problems of these people on such limited resources.

But the Clinic was an immediate success - not financially, for there are never enough funds to support a non-profit organization of this type. And most of the patients were unable to pay for their treatment, not because they weren't working, but because every penny that they made generally was needed just to keep their families alive. But the Clinic survived and flourished simply because it filled a very vital human need, by providing free primary medical care to people who could not afford to get it elsewhere.

Over the past twelve years, this small community organization has forged a unique and responsive network of resources and medical service providers, including volunteer physicians, and other health workers. These professionals along with a supportive staff now offer a broad range of quality medical services every weekday and evening. The Venice Family Clinic has become the "family doctor" to thousands of people who cannot find or afford a place in the traditional medical care system.

Who, you may be asking, are these thousands of people who come to the Clinic?

The Clinic is open to any needy person, and the patients now come in from all parts of Los Angeles. This year, more than 10,000 patients are expected, a 12% increase from last year. This means that an average of 55 patients a day line up to be registered to see a doctor in one of the various programs offered by the Clinic. Appointments are made for weekly specialty clinics such as women's, seniors and high blood pressure, but no appointments are made in advance for the walk-in pediatric and adult clinics; patients are treated on a first come first served basis, which means that on many days people must be turned away because there is not enough time or enough medical staff to see them.

Almost 41% of the patients live in Venice itself, most within easy walking distance of the Clinic. Approximately 56% are Hispanic, necessitating bilingual volunteers, staff and literature. 37% are under fifteen years of age. 86% have yearly incomes under the federal poverty level. And 100% have come to the Venice Family Clinic because they need help and have nowhere to go.

Serving the enormous number of people has required the dedication and hard work of volunteers on many levels, creating a thriving and energetic family unit to reach out to the community.

Our volunteers include 550 community people. 100 are doctors, 70 are clinic assistants who are backed up by 10 fulltime and 5 parttime employees.

Twelve years ago all the Clinic could afford was simple medical care, barely over the level of first aid. Now the Clinic offers general pediatric and adult clinics on Monday through Thursday, plus regularly scheduled clinics for women; for senior citizens; eye clinics, both optometry and ophthalmology; high blood pressure testing; dermatology clinics, ear, nose and throat, neurology, cardiology clinics and nutrition counseling.

Further, the Clinic's doctors have initiated a much needed referral system helping obtain medical specialty services not available at the Clinic, or hospitalization for patients who would otherwise be unable to get specialized treatment.

Needless to say, all this costs money. And in the face of ever-diminishing government funds, the Venice Family Clinic is striving to increase its support from private sources. To keep the Clinic open this year will cost nearly $450,000. And it is no small task to make ends meet.

For the past four years the major source of income for the Clinic has been the annual Venice Art Walk, a day long open house of local artists' studios and art galleries, with a crafts faire and silent auction of contemporary art, culminating with a fabulous dinner. Last year more than 2500 people contributed $25 each to walk and ride buses throughout Venice. The profit from this day was an incredible $145,000. This year the Clinic is striving to increase that profit to $200,000. The Art Walk relies on the support of local artists, who contribute by opening their studios for the day and on more than 400 volunteers who help with the pre-Art Walk arrangements as well as serving as guides to those who participate in the tour. Each year a local artist is generous enough to create the Art Walk poster, which announces the tour and then is sold city-wide. This year an extraordinary poster has been created by world renowned artist David Hockney. It will be available unsigned at a price of $25, and signed by the artist for $100.

Another way local merchants and friends can aid the Clinic is to purchase advertisements in the Art Walk Guidebook which, in addition to a map of the studios open the day of the Walk, gives biographies of local artists and is a compendium of services and merchants in the area whose advertisements range from a few lines to a full page.

The date of this year's Art Walk is Sunday, May 15. Some of the local artists who have been generous enough to open their studios include: Guy Dill, Eric Orr, Stephanie DeLange, Margit Omar, Claire Falkenstein, Diana Hobson, Laddie John Dill, and much more.

After the Art Walk there will be a dinner, entertainment and dancing at Santa Monica Place. The theme of this post-Art Walk party is the Venice Boardwalk, and the cost will be $150 per person which includes the Art Walk admission.

The Venice Family Clinic is located at 322 S. Lincoln Bl.

October 1983 #166

FOR THE RECORD
(Note: This letter was written in response to Stan Price's letter on behalf of Tuum Est which appeared in the Sept. Beachhead)

Dear Stan,

I can only guess at your reaction to the letter you sent me, if it had, in the past, arrived on your desk at Venice Legal Services. But I certainly don't have to guess about my reaction, especially having heard from a number of the current tenants of the St. Charles and having seen a copy of the eviction notice they received only 15 days ago.

I erred in my article only as regards the actual legal lessee of the St. Charles. In our phone conversation you stated that the relative of a person connected with Tuum Est had lease the building for use by Tuum Est. I have now been informed that a group of people from Tuum Est "inspected" the building. You are splitting a very fine hair by stating "Tuum Est is thus not involved in the eviction from the hotel..."

Your statements concerning the letter and spirit of the Rent Control law and that neither you nor Tuum Est know anything about the future of the building are difficult for me to reconcile with the facts in this matter. The owners, or whoever is leasing the building, may be complying with the letter of the law, though even that is debatable, but the spirit is quite a different matter. We are, after all, dealing with 40 people who have been given 30 days to find new places to live at the height of the summer months in what I'm certain you know to be a very tight rental market. Given the current rental situation, where it costs a minimum of 3 times the rent simply to move into a new apartment, the offer of $1,000 is quite minimal these days. So, neither the time allowed nor the relocation "benefits" appear to have much spirit attached to them.

As to the future use of the building you might want to look at the eviction notice, especially given your statement about having been informed of the eviction process. That notice quite frankly declares that the eviction is proceeding in order to remove the building from the residential market "to be converted to commercial use. Said conversion is to be accomplished as soon as the units have been vacated." Furthermore, if, as you contend, Tuum Est is such a good neighbor don't you feel that they ought to be concerned about the future use of the hotel as it may affect the environment in which Tuum Est functions?

As to my single reference to Sienna, it had nothing to do with the Tuum Est drug program nor any other aspect of that organization save its current involvement at the St. Charles. It was not meant as a scare tactic, and the reference to red-baiting is patently absurd, but for many people here the analogy holds quite strongly. You, and the people of Tuum Est, are quite out of touch with reality if you do not understand that many people make a connection between the two organizations, especially considering the origin of Tuum Est. Tuum Est, by its almost total non-participation in the community, has done nothing to dispel the partially negative image it has. Having attempted on a couple of occasions to contact and involve Tuum Est in community issues some years ago and having met with great disinterest, I had little reason to feel that matters had changed presently. But now, partially due to what I wrote and certainly in no way die to Tuum Est taking the slightest initiative, the (last) Beachhead contained articles from the Hotel residents and from Tuum Est.

I understand and empathize with Tuum Est's housing problem due to the necessity to bring the building up to seismic safety standards. I have been aware of their dilemma for some time. The fact that Tuum Est has not been able, for more than a year, to find a building or a community to which to move is testimony to the unique quality of "live and let live" found in Venice people. I hope you will make your client aware of this accepting attitude and impress on them the fact that the very people who are being displaces are among the most tolerant type of Venice resident. No matter who replaces them, if the past few years are any indication, they will be more affluent and less tolerant of such things as a substance rehab program in their neighborhood. Tuum Est is, in my judgment, working against its own interest in this community by its involvement in the eviction of the 40 residents of the St. Charles Hotel.

All of the above is my personal opinion in this matter. It in no way attempts to represent any other person or party. I hope this letter clarifies my feelings in this matter and that you understand the broader implications of the eviction of the residents of the St. Charles.
Yours truly, Moe Stavnezer

Dear Moe:
I appreciate your concern about the eviction of the residents of the St. Charles. However, Tuum Est is irrevocably committed to its renovation plan and cannot alter it at this point.

Tuum Est has only a short term sublease interest in the property. What the owners intend to do when Tuum Est vacates the premises is something you'll have to ask the owners about.
Sincerely yours, Stanton J. Price

October 1983 #166

St. Charles Blues
Andre Hall, Ex-St. Charles tenant

Will the struggle to keep the tenants of the St. Charles Hotel on the corner of Windward Avenue and Speedway from being evicted become a rallying point of protest within the community of Venice against forced evictions, or shall it be swept aside by the profit seeking co-owners of the St. Charles Hotel, whose past and present intentions have not been in the best interests of the tenants?

The St. Charles Hotel. more than 80 years old, has been a home (roach infested, of course) for many Venetians of the avante garde persuasion. It has also been a place of residence for many people with a low income.

The forced eviction with a relocation bribe is tantamount to total disregard for the welfare of the St. Charles Hotel tenants. The Co-owners (Reesy Shaw, Tom Lochtefeld $ Co.) of the St. Charles and others will more than likely claim that the relocation bribe fee sill suffice as being adequate compensation.

What they will have failed to understand is that no price can be put on the months and years of living in a building where one has planted roots of care and love of one's surroundings and neighbor tenants.

To those who accepted the eviction bribe with or without a feeling of remorse; it can only be said that life itself is worth living if one struggles for the benefit of all against exploitation and oppression being perpetuated by the ruling rich class and not for one's individual greed and self-interest.

The letter submitted to the August '83 Beachhead by the attorney for Tuum Est, Stanton J. Price, should be examined closely. It should be noted that the Tuum Est attorney's statement of finding an "empty" building such as the St. Charles Hotel is a distortion of the truth. The St. Charles is, in fact, presently housing tenants who wish to stay on in their rightful place of residence.

The point of contention is not whether or not Tuum Est has been a service to the Venice community. The line of demarcation is the rights of the people vs. business interests.

A question arises as to why Tuum Est would seek temporary residence at the St. Charles Hotel knowing full well that they would indirectly be accomplices to the eviction of the St. Charles tenants? Was the bid for the St. Charles lucrative in regards to the profit margin for both parties involved?

And, for what reason could the co-owners want to evict the tenants of the St. Charles for the relatively short period of eight to twelve months occupancy by Tuum Est? Are the co-owners of the St. Charles planning to turn the building into a business enterprise?

One may toss this about: the 1984 Olympics.

It has been reported in the Westside section of the LA Times (9/8/83) that the tenants of the Cadillac Hotel on Ocean Front Walk have been given eviction notices. A suit challenging the evictions of the Cadillac tenants claims that the owner, Werner Scharff, plans to convert the hotel into a restaurant, hotel or bed-and-breakfast inn for the 1984 Olympics. Could the same 1984 Olympics debacle also be in store for the St. Charles Hotel before or after the possible temporary take-over by Tuum Est? And, after Tuum Est and the Olympics...

SUPPORT THE TENANTS OF THE ST. CHARLES HOTEL TO CONTINUE THEIR TENANCY with your moral and written support at this time of need. The St. Charles Tenants Association is circulating a petition regarding their eviction. They may be contacted by writing them at 25 Windward Ave, Venice CA 90291 or call (213)----

ADDENDUM:

As a result of the St. Charles Tenants' Association's having challenged their evictions, the case for Unlawful Detainer was dismissed and rents were collected for September.

The tenants, represented by attorney Steve Clare, raised the defense that they were not provided with their relocation benefits and that the purported conversion of the building for commercial use was nebulous. Further, the owners had not complied with the Municipal Code. At this point, it remains to be seen whether rents for October will be accepted of it new Notices to Vacate will be issued. PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITION!

October 1983 #166

Cadillac Hotel
by Arnold Springer

Elderly tenants living in the Cadillac Hotel (Dudley and Ocean Front Walk in Venice have obtained a temporary restraining order which forbids the building's owners from evicting or harassing them. Owner Werner Scharff denies that he intended to evict the tenants.

However tenants report that notices were posted in the building lobby informing occupants that extensive repairs and renovations to the structure would take place at some unspecified future date and encouraging those wishing to avoid the noise and inconvenience to move at their convenience.

Elderly tenants became frightened and with the aid of the Israel Levin Center contacted the Bet Tsedek legal services agency which specializes in aid to low income people. Lawyer Janna Zimmer went into Santa Monica Superior Court in Sept. and convinced conservative judge Lawrence Rittenband to issue a temporary restraining order against Scharff. Rittenband ruled that no repairs or renovations could begin prior to Scharff's obtaining all necessary permits from the City of Los Angeles and the California Coastal Commission. Pending issuance of those permits the owners were cautioned not to harass or attempt to evict the Cadillac tenants.

News of the alleged harassment and evictions followed publication in the Sept. Beachhead of a long interview with Mr. Scharff in which the prominent landowner announced his "return" to Venice development, acknowledged his recent purchase of the Cadillac Hotel, and pledged to build low cost senior housing near the beach in Venice, in part to house those seniors who would eventually be displaced from residential apartments to a tourist hotel.

Lawyer Zimmer is presently seeking a permanent injunction against Scharff. The hearing on that request is scheduled before Judge Rittenband in Dept. C, Santa Monica Superior Court on Oct. 21.

Uncle Remus
Rocks Venice

This controversy was so very Venice. Here are 3 pieces from the Free Venice Beachhead, plus one by local writer Thomas Pleasure that was in the LA Times.

Fox Features Fascist Flick

Feb 1981 #134

What do you think of a "children's movie" in which Black people are slaves, are shown to be happy working all day and singing all night, in which they are portrayed as grown children, never angry at their condition of enforced dependency or at the whites who rule them, and in which they are filled with love for those who oppress them?

Should you let your children be exposed to these vicious and harmful racist ideas and images in this film?

Well, Walt Disney Studios is celebrating Ronald Reagan's election be re-releasing Song of the South as their contribution to the resurgence of the right wing. At a time when the Ku Klux Klan has reemerged in California and in North Carolina to kill people in the streets in broad daylight, at a time when Black children are being murdered in Buffalo, Atlanta and Oakland, the Fox Venice has scheduled Song of the South throughout the day and evening of Sunday, Feb. 8th so that all the families of Venice and Ocean Park can share in the "great family fun" of seeing "an imaginative combination of animation and live action."

The lesson of the film is that life is as it should be. Any person - Black or white, child or adult - who wants to change their unhappy situation and leave the "plantation" for a better life will always experience something worse. What is animated so cutely is the brutality of tarring, hanging, burning, and mutilation that are used to enslave people. These punishments are presented in cartoon form of Br'er Rabbit, who, after he ventures from his "plantation" - the briar patch - is always happy to avoid the dangers of life by escaping back to where he came from. The psychological lesson learned by children who identify with Br'er Rabbit is that what is, is better than what could be.

Many of us grown-ups haven't seen Song of the South for 20-30 years and only remember a warm, happy film with live people and funny carton characters. Remember Br'er Rabbit and his thorny shelter, the Briar Patch, the beautiful singing Bluebird, the happy people working and singing who are never really dirty or tired? Well, only vaguely, and certainly not as a racist movie! But these happy people were slaves and the whites, whom they supposedly loved so much, had the power of life and death over every one of them.

The book, from which the movie is taken was written in about 1870 and it depicts slave live in an earlier time on the plantation. Around 1870, the Ku Klux Klan was on the rise and preparing to force the recently freed slaves into a kind of servitude almost as bad as slavery. Reconstruction would end in only 6 years with the deal that put Hayes into the White House and the slaves "back in their place."

The last 20 years have seen many strides made by the civil rights movement and the resulting, though very slight, bettering of life for some Black people here. But now, with the economy in a mess, the Klan is on the rise again to once more put Blacks, and other non-white people, in their place. The political manifestation of the rise of racism is the election of Ronald Reagan espousing the politics of the right replete with the same "states rights" policies of Rutherford B. Hays 100 years ago. This is once again, the beginning of the end of Reconstruction -- a call to return to earlier and simpler times when Blacks knew, and stayed in, their place. Small wonder that this is also a time for the re-issuance of Song of the South.

A group of community people from Venice and Santa Monica have asked the management of the Fox Venice not to show Song of the South because of its racist message for children. The management has refused to pull the movie. But our main message is to you, especially those of you with children.

We are asking parents not to attend or allow their children to attend this film showing, both as a protest to the racism in the picture and as a statement of awareness and concern about the period of increasing race hatred and violence that our country is now entering.

Please join our picket line on Sunday, February 8th at 1:00 p.m. in front of the Fox Theater, 620 Lincoln Blvd, and bring your children to a FREE showing of several Charlie Chaplin films to be shown from 1:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. at the Methodist Church, located a few blocks south of the Fox Venice Theater at the corner of Lincoln Blvd. and Victoria Avenue. The films include "The Immigrant," "Easy Street," and "Kid Auto Races in Venice," (otherwise known as "The Pest"). Let us unite as a concerned community.

INSERT to this issue:

RACIST FILM WITHDRAWN! COMMUNITY CELEBRATES!
repeats part of the above article, then goes on to say;
This was the film to be shown at the Fox Venice Theatre, Sunday February 8th. Divergent people, offended by this film and concerned about the rise of racism is this country, came together to protest the showing of Song of the South at the Fox Venice. Our efforts convince the owners of the Fox, Landmark Films, Inc., to review the film and finally, only a few days ago, to withdraw it from their schedule. The cooperation, patience and perseverance of the many people demonstrated to Landmark that such examples of racism will not go unchallenged in our community.

This successful effort to have Song of the South removed from our neighborhood theater is only one aspect of a continuing need to make latent and overt racism the object of swift and strong protest. Far from being settled, the question of racial inequality in America has barely moved from the picture painted by this film. In fact the re-release of the film comes at a time when the small gains minorities and women have achieved in the last twenty years are being threatened.

To celebrate this victory and encourage others to voice their opposition to these kinds of racist occurrences the coalition which led the effort to stop Song of the South will hold a celebration at 1 p.m., Sunday February 8th in front of the Fox Venice. Please come and join us - and send in the coupon below if you would like to participate further in the ongoing fight against racism in America. (return to Anti-Racism Coalition, 212 Pier Avenue, Santa Monica CA 90405)

Song of the South Wrap-Up
by Ed Pearl
March 1981 #135

As one of the organizers of the protest against the racist film, Song of the South, I am most appreciative of the BeachHead's placing it as last month's feature story. You are to be commended as consistent fighters against racism, sexism, and attacks against non-wealthy people. We, the Venice Community, need you as a trustworthy clarion; our own Paul Revere, so to say.

Because of that immense value, I was dismayed at the overkill of your headline, "FOX FEATURES FASCIST FILM.":

First of all, it is inaccurate. Nobody claimed it as fascist, genocidal, or anything other than "Mickey Mouse" pernicious racist. After all, what will you say when the Fox plays a truly fascist film - Triumph of the Will, say, or worse, an American film promoting fascism? The forces of reaction will no doubt point to this headline to label both yourselves and the protesters of this film as reckless leftists and censors of cartoons. This diminishes your voice and our effectiveness as organizers against the growing racism of this political period. We do not wish to be dismissed and that headline did not help.

I hope our community protest will call to the attention of parents and educators the subtle mis-education of these clever films and lend strength to the demands of color that Hollywood stop producing bigoted stereotypes for our children and begin showing people as they are in their real life situations. At the same time we have to deal with two facts: almost all cartoons - not to mention films for adults - are outrageously sexist, racist, violent, and generally misogynist, and that parents have also been brought up with these films, remember them fondly, and defend their right to see them or anything else they wish. Many parents in front of the theater were responsive when we pointed out that Hollywood had made almost no films which dealt with Black people fairly, let alone racism in life or in film. Our struggle for a more human culture must be built both by bold actions like the successful film boycott and ongoing, sensitive education, mindful of parental protectiveness and civil liberties.

Some people felt that the community should have been openly thankful to the Fox for substituting Lady and the Tramp for Song of the South. But the Fox pulled the film because we began distributing leaflets, NOT because of any agreement. In fact, they refused to meet with our community delegation. My own feeling was that we were more in the position of a union winning a small concession from management - the UAW really doesn't go around thanking GM, does it? In the end, the Fox acted like the traditional redbaiting boss. At the Sunday 5:30 showing of the substitute film, only two of us were distributing our leaflet explaining our position. We were not asking people to boycott Lady and the Tramp. The Sunday manager came out three times and announced to people that someone attached to our group had called threatening violence to the theater, perhaps bombing, and that was the reason they'd pulled the film. This was a blatant lie, proven by their interview five days before in the Feb. 5 Ocean Front Weekly, stating: "We agreed to cancel the presentation after reconsidering the position taken by the people protesting the film. We're trying to be a community-oriented theater." One customer almost punched me for wanting to do violence to his 12-year-old. We spoke for over ten minutes until he calmed down, understood our ideas about the film and saw the list of ministers and community leaders endorsing the boycott. He was then angry at the Fox for this rotten slander. The next day, Reverend Michael Cowan or our coalition called Terry Thorne, manager of the theater and asked for an explanation. Thorne not only didn't deny the slander but refused to discuss it.

Our common struggle intensifies and we need the BeachHead ever so much as a respected voice to set the record straight. Take yourselves seriously and don't overkill on headlines and rhetoric.

Letter to the Editor from David Fertik

I feel compelled to write to you in response to your February issue with the frightening headline "FOX FEATURES FASCIST FLICK", which resulted in the Fox Venice's decision to cancel the showing of Song of the South.

1. Your enormous letters of your headlines seemed to be used to incite your readers and to frighten and coerce the Fox management to capitulate to your wishes.

2. The Body of your story never proves your headlines. Certainly the film contains racial stereotypes. But to equate stereotyping with racism and equate racism with fascism is pushing it. No adult would take this piece of fantasy entertainment as overtly projecting racism or fascism. It is not Triumph of the Will. Can you even imagine the KKK using Song of the South for propaganda purposes?

3. Your article's thrust decries the dangerous effect this film would have on innocent children - as if seeing Mary Poppins would convince children that all nannies could fly with umbrellas. If The Song of the South is so dangerous, how did you guys manage to grow up to be the equalitarians you are? You admit in the article only "remembering the film as a warm happy film with live people and funny cartoon characters."

4. Your assessment of the South's content is very subjective anyway. I remember the film communicating that Black people are the loving, joyous people in the world. The White people are troubled frustrated and unhappy. The young white boy finds the greatest warmth and joy by associating with blacks. Spiritually, the film suggests that happiness is not a function of wealth and power - what a threatening idea for the Reagan administration.

5. Your article suggests that The Song of the South was to be shown by the Fox and was released by Disney studios to celebrate Reagan's election and the return of right wing power. This is then linked up to the KKK and the killing of black children around the country. To me, this is irresponsible, yellow journalism of the worst kind, especially considering the proximity of the Oakwood neighborhood, a neighborhood beset by unemployment, drug abuse, and violence. This is why I believe your paper coerced the Fox Venice. You created a dangerous situation by suggesting the Fox was showing a film that you say creates a climate for the killing of black children. This coercion is not calm, clear, rational communication. This is fascism.

6. To me censorship especially in the arts and communications is the worst sign of impending fascism in a free society. By your article you have justified censorship and created a healthy environment for intolerance and fascism. Are your actions any different form the "moral Majority" stopping a local movie theater in Yahoo, Mississippi from showing Hearts and Minds by calling it commie propaganda, or Last Tango in Paris by calling it a film of sexual perversion? How would you feel if the local paper had intimidated the local theater? I'd feel ripped off.

"Song of the South":
a Fascist Film?
by Thomas Pleasure

(This article appeared in the Sunday Calendar section of the L.A. Times. Thomas Pleasure is a longtime Venice activist and writer of social commentary.)

Last spring, the Fox Venice Theater scheduled a Saturday showing of the Walt Disney classic "Song of the South." Immediately, it was attacked by a community organization called Coalition Against Racism, which opposed the screening on the grounds that Uncle Remus was a fascist tool and that the animated fables were clever devices designed to keep the "natives" down on the farm, to keep them accepting of slavery.

"A Fascist Flick" roared the headlines of the community newspaper, Venice Beachhead, and the management of the Fox Venice yielded to the demands for "censorship."

Well, comparing a film of yesterday with today's standards isn't, in and of itself, a very compelling reason for censorship. The charge that a film about the antebellum South is biased and racist against blacks goes without saying. What film of '47 wasn't

As far as the charge of promoting slavery, what biblical feature of Cecil B DeMille's could pass the stringent tests the coalition put forward, i.e., Does the film portray slaves as passive and accepting of slavery? That would wipe out "Spartacus," "Quo Vadis," "Ben Hur," and "The Ten Commandments." And don't discount those slaves just because they were white. Slaves are slaves, no matter what color. What Disney seems guilty of is portraying black slaves as happy, instead of sad, like DeMille's white slaves. But then, Disney was making a musical.

What is of questionable value is the film's *funky portrayal of white people. Over the years I have seen "Song of the South" four times. Each time I left the theater feeling elated but with the distinct impression that the white people had been raked over the coals in a subtle way. Whether it was the rich plantation owners or the poor white trash, these white Southerners were portrayed by Disney as unfeeling, uptight and downright stupid.

The father finks on the family and splits for the big city, seeking fame and fortune as a newspaperman. His wife, a typically beautiful Southern belle, is slightly nutty and seriously spoiled. Grandma's a crank and grandpa is conspicuously absent from the scene. No wonder the little boy (Bobby Driscoll) wants to run away from home.

And who should save the day but Uncle Remus (James Baskett) and his controversial tales. As a matter of storyline, it's the blacks who come out smelling like night-blooming jasmine, with Uncle Remus the star of the show. However, in my opinion, biased by four years of working in an office of minorities (I was the showcase "white" in a department of black and brown poverty-program officials), the censorship of the film hurts the black-awareness movement far more than it helps it.

The film, though, is so blatant in its anti-white bias that one can't help but think that Disney had something other than a "fascist plot" in mind when he adapted Joel Chandler Harris's literary tales. The result was a widely successful cartoon feature.

The key to its popularity lies in the tales Uncle Remus tells of Br'er Rabbit's struggles in the Briar Patch with Br'er Fox and Br'er Bear. The tales succeed in keeping Bobby Driscoll from running away from home' they show Bobby and Luana Patten, his exquisite girlfriend (of the poor-white family) how to cope with her two mean brothers (who parallel Fox and Bear both in appearance and deed), and in the end they help the white plantation family to come together.

No matter your skin color, these animal stories are rich in human truths. Caught by Br'ers Fox and Bear, Br'er Rabbit pleads, "Do anything you want to me, but whatever you do *don't throw me in that briar patch" (which I know like the back of my hand). Each of Uncle Remus's animated messages is about survival in the Briar Patch (of Life). There's a way for everyone to survive, including a poor rabbit.

We all know that to survive slavery you have to do many unthinkable things. What "Song of the South" shows us is that to survive, the black people banded together. When the slaves went to the fields, it wasn't, as the coalition claimed, all peaches and cream - they were singing soulful spirituals. At night, around the campfire, they sang about freedom. When Uncle Remus goes down the road with Mr. Bluebird on his shoulder, he is singing, and by the end of the film, so is the audience.

What also comes out of Disney's pro-black film is an appreciation of the close familial relationships that existed between black and white, so close that they raised each other's children despite the strict codes of conduct that separated them. Plantation life was, indeed, a curious paradox.

Whites, though, may wish to censor this film just to save face. There is, however, an obvious consequence to censoring it. We, and especially our children, would not get to see an enjoyable, positive black Southern folk-hero, nor would we hear the African animal fables that Harris and Disney left in Uncle Remus's care.

Et Tu, Tuum Est, et al
KICKING THE HABITANTS
by Ann Clayton
September 1983 #165

Rumors flew in June '83 at the St. Charles Hotel. Jack at the liquor store had been formally evicted and we residents figured it was a matter of time for us,and we were right.

We had a tenants' meeting with a representative from the Tenant Action Center. At that time we understood that a party from Tuum Est had looked at the building and said they would be interested, provided the environment was "drug free." This seemed consistent with the eviction of the liquor store. In order to eliminate the confusion generated by rumor, one tenant telephoned Lochtefeld, a nonresident owner, and was informed that Tuum Est was negotiating to lease the place. The Tenant Action Center lawyer was reluctant to get involved with any action that would involve local citizenry opposing the introduction of a drug rehab center. He said maybe there would be a zoning restriction on Tuum Est, but otherwise we hadn't much legal grounds for opposition at that time.

An inchoate resistance already seemed afloundering, but various parties responded various ways, and by July, it was obvious Jack was in, and we weren't evicted. Optimism. Then, August 1st we were served a "30 Day Notice to Quit." Pertinent phrases read: "The landlord in good faith seeks to recover possession of said premises in order to remove the rental unit permanently from rental housing use"; also, "premises are to be converted to commercial use. Said conversion is to be accomplished as soon as all units have been vacated...there is a relocation fee of $1,000.00 available for your unit. Upon surrender of the premises said fee shall be paid. Attached hereto is a current list of vacant and available units of comparable size and amenities."

A local business owner has said that a gentleman names Steinbach who works with the Building and Safety Department has informed him that Tuum Est cannot occupy the St. Charles without violating local code. Back in June, Sergeant Tucker of the Pacific Division of the LAPD said Tuum Est had no record of negative activity. Yet no one would rent to them. Sgt. Tucker's statement of no problems with Tuum Est leaves a question of Tuum Est being closed out of housing unjustly. Collective landlord guilt or perhaps a hallmark of justified concern?

The point is now, we do not know who is coming into the building for a fact. Whoever it is, the eviction notice indicates that the new use of the building must be commercial.

We also know that the residents of the St. Charles Hotel, mostly creative, working, self-sufficient (read: it's up to you) people are being put out into the street unless they go along with this deal and accept this thousand dollar bribe. A flowering community of residents who enhance the neighborhood (the Venice Chamber of Commerce has expressed concern) is being evicted. Why?

Speaking for myself, I spent my early childhood (1952-1957) in Carmel and have lived my adult life in what sociologists euphemistically refer to as "transitional neighborhoods." I am tired of moving.

I ask the community to offer its consideration and advice. We can continue to let our neighborhoods be raped, year after year; perhaps there is an alternative. The time is now.

Re: Tuum Est, Inc.
Staff note: the following letter was sent to the Beachhead* by the attorney who represents Tuum Est.

Dear Mr. Stavnezer,

In connection with the St. Charles Hotel, you would have best served the community if, instead of, in your own words, relying on rumor, you contacted either the owners of the Hotel or Tuum Est to obtain first hand information. You would have done the community an even greater service if, when I contacted you, you listened to what I had to say rather than acting as defensively as you did. In any event, whether or not you care to pay any attention, I feel obliged for the record to make clear to you the facts in the situation.

Tuum Est, as you know, has been running a substance abuse program with great success in the Venice community for over ten years. The building in which Tuum Est residents live, however, must be brought up to current seismic safety standards. The building, though, cannot be rehabbed with the residents remaining in it. Accordingly, the Program had to find relocation housing for the residents. It is not an easy mater to find an empty building meeting the Program's need that anyone is willing to lease in its entirety for the relatively short period of time - ten to twelve months - needed for the construction work on the building the Program owns.

Tuum Est is thus not involved in the evictions from the Hotel, but has been offered the property as a possible relocation site. I have been informed and believe that the owners of the Hotel are complying with the letter and spirit of the Los Angeles rent control ordinance and are providing each of the tenants with all relocation rights and benefits.

As I indicated, the Program will be in the Hotel for a relatively short period of time, probably through the end of next summer, although the exact amount of time will be a function of the time it takes to rehab the Program's building. As Tuum Est does not own the Hotel, neither the Program staff nor I know what will happen to it after the Program returns to its own building. That is something you might want to talk to the Hotel owners about.

You should also be aware that this whole matter has nothing to do with Synanon and your references to Synanon in your article were inappropriate and simply amounted to a scare tactic, a form of red-baiting.

I hope, if you continue to write about the St. Charles Hotel, you will make use of the facts of the situation as outlined above rather than rumor. I hope also, you will keep in mind that Tuum Est operates an outstanding and much-needed program.

If you think about all this for a few minutes you will realize that Tuum Est's continues existence on Ocean Front Walk is an essential factor in the maintenance of the ethnic, social and economic mix that the Venice community has long prized. If Tuum Est leaves the community, that mix loses one of its main anchor points. You sill thus do your community no service by attacking one of the community's major friends and supports.

Sincerely yours,
Stanton J. Price

(Note: Mr. Price was, at one time, an attorney with Venice Neighborhood Legal Services and later with the National Health Law Program.)

© 2004 - 2010 Pat Hartman
For VirtualVenice e-mail news: send a blank email with "subscribe" in the subject line
"Table of Contents" or site map here it is

MORE BeachHead Archives

Street performers

30 Years Ago This Month in the Free Venice Beachhead

Tale of the Fox

Free Venice Beachhead Archives INSTITUTIONS

Tuum Est: a 70s Program stands up to the 80s by Beaumarie St. Clair - Dec. 1979

Skill Center Success Story

CLARE-i-fying the question by Moe Stavnezer Free Venice Beachhead June 1980 #126 AND update, exclusive to Virtual Venice, July 2005

Sunday, July 03, 2005: CLARE, REVISITED by Moe Stavnezer

Fox Features Fascist Flick

Feb 1981 #134

Song of the South Wrap-Up by Ed Pearl March 1981 #135

Letter to the Editor from David Fertik

Free Venice Beachhead Archives
INSTITUTIONS

Tuum Est: a 70s Program stands up to the 80s
by Beaumarie St. Clair - Dec. 1979

CLARE-i-fying the question
by Moe Stavnezer
Free Venice Beachhead June 1980 #126
AND update, exclusive to Virtual Venice, July 2005

Sunday, July 03, 2005: CLARE, REVISITED
by Moe Stavnezer

Song of the South Wrap-Up
by Ed Pearl
March 1981 #135