a     monthly     alternative     community     newsletter     serving     Free     Speech     in     Venice     California                    
February 2007 19th Edition     Archives        Message Board        Blog         For information or to submit material please Email us
          STOP ALL WAR RIGHT NOW!
Want to support this website? Make
your tax-deductible
donation here: 
VIDEO AND PHOTOS
Arlington West
Dogg Daze
Graffiti Gallery
SOV Photo Gallery

POP-TV has a new
Cable TV Internship
See Buddy Clark
to Sign up for free
Media Internships
310-266-9465

Fax 310-401-0274
email
COOL  LINKS
Anti-War Radio
Current TV
Deep Eddy
1st Amendment
Free Press
Free Speech Radio
Free Speech TV
Hotmall
VENICE BEACH
About Us Now
Beachhead
Beach Cam
Councilmember
Drum Circle
GRVNC
History
Hostels
Rec & Parks
SOV Blog
SOV Petition
SOV News Group
Surf Report
Venice Forum
Venice Paper
Free Energy
by Spirit of Ma'at
The video "Free Energy The Race to Zero Point" is an eye-opening account of free energy technology, why we don't have it yet, and what is being done about that.

First, this video gives us a brief history of the scientists, like Tesla, Schauberger, who have pioneered free energy and alternative energy, and describes their persecution by those who seek to control the world's energy.

Then we are presented with a series of first- person interviews with several of the 1000s of today's inventors who have braved the possibility of prison or worse to create their machines.

We enter into their laboratories, hear their descriptions of how the inventions work, and see them at work. Antigravity effects: with heavy objects floating around! are among the many wonders on view.

James Graham, gave us these four examples: Utah's Paul Pantone has developed the GEET fuel processor, a plasma generator with a super carburettor that runs on 80 percent water and is non- polluting. The engine he has designed can run on anything from oil to water. It transmutes elements through a form of plasma discharge, and produces no carbon in the exhaust. He has run this engine since 1983, and never needed to clean the engine. A  full-scale Ford 2600cc 4-cylinder prototype engine is shown working, achieving efficiencies of 300 percent (that is, if the original was getting 20 mpg, this one gets 60), with no carbon coming out of exhaust.

Despite the bogus claims of government scientists regarding cold fusion, the Patterson Power Cell designed by Dr James Patterson is one of the most spectacular devices in the cold energy field. His cell uses tiny coated metal beads and ordinary water and produces a flowing stream of spectacular energy. Even when switched off, it produces 20W energy for many days. The cell has achieved over one thousand watts output with just one watt of input. Patterson explains how he managed to get a patent for this device "by accident." The byproduct and exhaust produces hydrogen and oxygen, which could be used to fuel hydrogen vehicles.

Joseph Newman who claims that his patents have been denied since the 1970s, is fascinated by the laws of the gyroscope and how the energy matches the conductor in a magnetic field. He has manufactured a motor that works on these principles and produces a running river of energy. The system flows so that you get more energy output than you put in, and has been ratified, he tells us, by 30 scientists around the world.

Canadian inventor John Hutchinson uses ultra-high electro-magnetic frequencies to change matter in interesting ways. The "Hutchinson effect" is a form of levitation by trans- lational  movements where objects become lighter and move around. Applications make use of zero point energy to power propulsion technologies eg. a crystal energy converter interfaces with the jittering of zero point energy, powering motors that can scale up to many horse- power. Also, simple batteries that border on the paranormal are shown. Through harnessing  electro- magnetic frequencies, metals levitate and transmute into unknown metal types. This is very much on the outer edge of science, where a type of dimension shift is created at the sub- atomic level by conventional electro- static, RF fields and Tesla waves which open up a keyway into time and space. Through the activated zero point energy fields and inter- dimensional gravitational waves, Hutchinson shows us stainless steel bars falling apart and transmuting into unknown metals and objects (we see a 70-lb. cannon ball becoming weightless and floating).

Many more inventors are interviewed and their machines shown in operation. Besides the four listed above, they include Tom Bearden*, Dr. Dennis Cravens, Hal Fox*, Dr. Shiuji Inomata, Moray King, Eugene Mallove, Jeane Manning*, Joseph Newman, Dr. Brian O'Leary, Dave Porter, Troy Reed, Roy Thornson, Paramahansa Tewari and Tom Valone. *(Asterisks indicate scientists whose articles appear in this issue of the Spirit of Ma'at

When we are through viewing this movie, we are fully aware that a world of free energy is a matter of priorities, not technology. If we all decide to have this, we will. Global communication is bringing the truth into general awareness. And, at least at the grassroots level, free and alternative energy devices are gradually becoming available. This technology can no longer be stopped.

For those who are interested it will be showing on Friday, Feb. 9 at 7:30pm -

Cafe Bolivar, 1741 Ocean Park Blvd.,
Santa Monica

Donation: $5

Food service ends at
7:00pm - come early for good food!

Email for questions

3,058 US Soldiers Killed
22,951 Seriously Wounded


US SPENDING IN IRAQ
Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq:
$9 billion of US taxpayers' money, $549.7 million in spare parts shipped
in 2004 to US contractors

 Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported:   $1.4 billion

Spent & Approved  War-Spending:
$505 billion of US taxpayers' funds, including $70 billion for fiscal year 2007. President Bush is expected to request another $100 billion in war-spending for 2007, bringing the cumulative total to over $600 billion !

US AND COALITION TROOPS IN IRAQ:

updated by US as of Jan 7, 2007

Total 146,100, including 132,000 from the US    7,100 from the UK and 7,100 from all other nations   Italy pulled out all its troops by Dec 2, 2006

US Troop Casualities:
3,058 US troops  -   98% male
90% non-officers; 78% active duty
13% National Guard   74% Caucasian   10% African-American  11% Latino    
19% killed by non-hostile causes    
54% of US casualties under 25 yrs old   68% were from the US Army
Non-US Troop Casualties:
Total 253,  with 130 from the UK

US Troops Wounded:

22,951: 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries (total excludes psychological injuries) 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home

US Military Helicopters Downed 
55 total, 28 by enemy fire

IRAQI TROOPS AND CIVILIANS IN IRAQ
Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated - A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place
Iraqi civilian casualties at over 600,000.

THE TAX MAN COMETH
by W. George E.K.French Well, it's only a little while 'til tax time rolls around, and it's about time you knew that you've been suckered again! Yes, you! You've been paying that damned “income tax” for years and you never question it. Sucker!!  Because you don't understand it, they've been taking you for a ride and it's been an expensive one at that. You're so ignorant that you don't even know the legal definition of “income.” You think it means all of the money you take in during the year. Suckered again! The Corporate Excise Tax Act of 1909 defined the meaning of income for the first and only time that the term “Income” has been LEGALLY defined. It is a bookkeeping term that applies ONLY to funds derived from a CORPORATE profit. Are you a corporation? For most of us, the answer is definitely NO. So are your wages income? Certainly not.  Your “salary?” Hell, no. Tips? Uh-uh. What about dividends? Nope. Interest? No way. "Funds derived from a corporate profit." It sounds so innocent, doesn't it? The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on that definition many times since 1909. The most famous of these cases was “Merchant's Loan and Trust versus Smitonka.”  another case was the “Brushaber Case.”  Probably by now, you're beginning to ask why you never heard about this before.  Hate to tell ya, Bubbah, but you've been screwed by  experts, suckered every year all over again.    

There are two “Code” books that apply here:  the Federal Tax Code and the Code of Federal Regulations.  About forty thousands pages of legal bull crap all together, and it's all designed to make you think that you owe them money.  You think you're letting your Country down if you don't pay up.  Lies.  Not one thin dime of what you pay goes into the General Fund.  NONE!!!  Every bit of what you pay goes to the private banks that makeup the “Federal Reserve” system.  This is all a huge swindle that the American People have been saddled with by our crooked government.  There isn't room to go into it here, but the kicker is that there is NO law that requires any of us to pay “Income Tax.”  That's right.  In all of those forty thousand pages of pure crap, there isn't a single law that says any mortal person must pay this.  The statutes that the IRS says give it authority to screw you apply only to Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  It all gets complicated, but rather than try to fight this thing after the fact, the trick is, don't give them your money in the first place.  That's it.  If you never let them get it, then you don't have to fight to get it back.  I CAN tell you how to get some of it back, but for now, let's just keep them from getting hold over it.  This is easy.  Tell your Employer that you want to fill out a new W-2 form.  This is the form that gives your employer your permission to take money from your pay and give it to the IRS.    You are going to do two things with this form.  First, you check off the box that says EXEMPT.  It's usually in the lower right hand corner.  You make your little “X” in the box provided and then you turn the form over.  On the back you write as follows:  “I didn't sign this because I wanted to, but because if I didn't I wouldn't get paid.”  Sign you name below that.

So here's the score.  In the US you are innocent until proven guilty.  You say your are EXEMPT. The only way anyone can prove otherwise is to take you to court and charge you with perjury.  To do this, they have to PROVE you're guilty.  They would have to produce a law that says you have to pay, and they can't because there isn't one. Legally, income tax is voluntary, because it doesn't fit into either of the two types of tax allowed by the Constitution. The term duress can be of interest here.  Since you had to fill out that W-2 form to get paid, you were under duress and cannot be held accountable for what you were forced to do under duress. Your employer no longer has your permission to take money from your paycheck, so he'll stop taking anything out for “income tax.”  Great. I get paid by the State of California. I did this W-2 form thing in 1992.  They haven't taken a dime out for the IRS since then, and since State tax is based on Federal, no state tax, either.   You need to learn this so that they can't keep on stealing your money under color of your lack of knowledge.  These bastards have been stealing billions from the American People for decades, using fear and our ignorance to screw us year in and year out.  If you continue to let them do it, then you deserve what you get.  I can teach you how and why, but I can't do it for you.  That's up to you.  Next time around, I'll go into the mysteries of the 1040 form, OMB numbers and a bunch of other stuff.  Stay tuned. © W. George E.K. French

Venice Boardwalk Lottery Update
by Barbara Peck
Stay tuned for more interesting developments on the Venice Boardwalk Lottery issue - one which, on the surface, appears to be about anti-social behavior among the "vendors", leading to the Citys enforcement of rules and regulations.  This is only partially true and here's why:  The west side of Venice Boardwalk, referred to as the "Free Speech Zone" is and has been a First Amendment protected area for as long as I have, personally, lived in Venice (since 1987).  The problem with congestion and conflict arose as a result of LA City’s refusal to monitor and, subsequently, eliminate COMMERCIAL VENDING (which is NOT protected by the First Amendment).  In fact, LA City allowed commercial vending to proliferate and flourish from approx. 1995 - 2006 by NOT enforcing their own LAMC 42.15, which strictly prohibited "Commercial Vending".

As of January 30, 2007, we await with baited breath the results of two lawsuits filed against LA City claiming the unconstitutionality of the latest LAMC 42.15.  A reliable source has revealed that on January 16, 2007, Matt Dowd ("Pacific Breeze Incense") and Michael Hunt ("Shea Butter Man") stood before Judge Pregerson in reference to their lawsuit filed in 2006, challenging the Citys denial of their right to sell their 'so-called' First Amendment protected products (incense and shea butter) on Venice Boardwalk.  Matt Dowd personally crafted said legal arguments by his own hand and was able to clearly, concisely and successfully challenge LA City attorney Mark Browns rebuttal to the extent that Judge Pregerson, according to sources, appears to have ruled in Matt and Mikes favor.

The January 16, 2007 judicial meeting actually pre-empted Carol Sobels meeting with Judge Pregerson which took place on January 29, 2007.  The official report of both these meetings, and their subsequent impact on the most recent LAMC 42.15, have yet to be revealed. Suffice it to say that Carol Sobel, a veteran Civil Rights attorney of 20 years or more, is rankled by the fact that two rebel-rousers, such as Matt and Mike, could have the audacity and the sagacity to upstage her and her lawsuit (which, by comparison, only weakly states the case). This is Carol Sobels second attempt at suing the City on Boardwalk related issues on behalf of Venice Food Not Bombs.  Unfortunately, Sobel has fallen short of addressing the fundamental First Amendment violations by the City and has merely nipped at the edges of the real problem. Consequently, her efforts have only served to exacerbate the problem for those engaged in resistance to the permit/lottery, while they have served to net her up to $100,000 in damages so far (and more to come).  (see SOVS November 2006 Edition http://www.spiritofvenice.com/sov16.htm)

Meanwhile the most egregious feature of LAMC 42.15 - the permit/lottery system - goes unchallenged either by Dowd or Sobel.  In fact, Sobel claims that the City "has the right to a permit" for Free Speech!  This is clearly incorrect, as has been proven by several Federal lawsuits filed in the past four years in New York, Seattle and Boston, when similar permit systems under enforcement were pronounced UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
(See http://www.spiritofvenice.com/sov9.htm)

Frustration continues to build on Venice Boardwalk among those who understand that, if you allow the City to require a permit for First Amendment protected activities you are, in effect, giving up your First Amendment right to those activities.  This conflict on Venice Boardwalk is not just about making a dollar - it has much greater and far reaching implications - which is why activists are refusing to give in and continue to resist any attempt by the City to regulate the Free Speech Zone.  © Barbara Peck

Gotham Gazette - Private Partnerships For Public Parks by Anne Schwartz 29 Jan  2007

Last year, the city parks department and the Randall's Island Sports Foundation worked out a deal to allow 20 private schools near-exclusive use of the island's ball fields during after-school hours in exchange for contributing $85.5 million over 30 years to help upgrade and maintain the fields. In a city with a steep divide between rich and poor, the agreement seemed to hit a nerve.  Daily News columnist Juan Gonzalez summed up the outrage felt by many (including public officials representing the area) at the notion of privileged private school students locking up public fields during the hours when many schools run sports programs: "No one has explained why public parks, these natural treasures of our great city, are suddenly being converted into private airlines with first-class and coach sections."

The deal illustrates the complications that can result from the reliance on private organizations to support what traditionally has been a public, taxpayer-funded service. The issue has been raised in park controversies around the city, from the inclusion of apartment buildings within the planned Brooklyn Bridge Park to City Hall's refusal to allow protesters to gather on the lawn in Central Park.

"The prospective agreement at Randall's Island is actually forcing all of us…to address the park dilemma straight on," said Christian DiPalermo, executive director of New Yorkers for Parks, the advocacy group. "Do we think parks are worthy of public investment so that they may provide universal access, or is it time to move to a model that requires some sacrifice in the universality of parkland in return for essential funding?"  ......

"The fear of privatization in any park is a reasonable fear," said Marianna Koval, executive director of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Conservancy, which works to support the park. "It is important to strike the right balance. The housing will work to sustain 74 acres in perpetuity. That's a great thing. Now, how do we protect against privatization from that housing, and across the board in this park?" Her organization is focusing on programming free activities and events in the park that establish "early patterns of use so that people feel welcome."

A more subtle form of privatization can result when the financial investment by a private group or donor gives them a proprietary interest in a park. 'The city cedes authority, control, and responsibility to a new class of owner, who has rights and privileges because they are the ones who have to pay off the costs," said Jonathan Greenberg, founder and coordinator of the Open Washington Square Park Coalition, which is fighting the park department's redesign of Washington Square Park.
During the Republican National Convention in 2004, the city denied protesters' request for a permit to rally in Central Park because it said the crowd would damage the carefully restored lawns. Protest organizers charged that the Central Park Conservancy's interest in protecting the lawns it had paid to restore trumped the more basic right of public assembly.

Greenwich Village residents who are fighting the park department's design for renovating Washington Square Park see the influence of New York University's dollars in the redesign calling for a centered fountain and a fenced-in greensward instead of a more modest renovation of the vibrant but somewhat unruly existing space.  Parks Commissioner Benepe rejects that notion, however. "The issue that private dollars are driving the discussion in projects is somewhat of a red herring. It's a substitute for the fact that some people just don't like the decisions that are being made," he said. "There are literally hundreds of projects at some stage of construction, design, and bidding. Unlike with most municipal projects, everybody has an opinion on it."   more      ©  Gotham Gazette
Web spiritofvenice.com
VENICE RIPPED OFF FOR OVER A MILLION
By Patrick McCartneyResearch by Venice Town Council:
(This article was written circa mid-1980s when Venice actually had a Town Council ! – what is a million dollars, then, worth now ?  Editor)

The oil site the City of Los Angeles leased out in 1964 (1965) on the public beach in Venice has been a sweet deal for the City.  Los Angeles has received millions of dollars in royalties and taxes from the site currently operated by Damson Oil.  But, after a brief flurry of improvements in Venice twenty years ago, the City has short-changed Venice residents repeatedly since.  Close to one million dollars intended for improvements in Venice have been diverted in the past, and another million dollars (and growing) is sitting in a special fund waiting to be spent, despite attempts by Parks and Recreation to use it. 
   
In fact, hardly any money from the Beach Improvement Capital Fund has been spent in Venice in over ten years, principally because,  as one City Hall insider told me,  "Pat Russell doesn't want to see the money go to anything but the Pavilion.  It's at a political standstill."  Al Carmichael of the City's Parks and Recreation Dept. told me that Russell is "holding out.  She would like to tear down the Pavilion and provide more parking."  While Pat Russell waits, Venice deteriorates.
   
Since the City sold an oil-and-gas-rights lease to Socony-Mobil for an initial bonus of $1.9 million that was on land owned by Los Angeles, the City bought the right to 16 and 2/3 percent royalties on every barrel of oil produced during the 35 years of the lease's life.  On top of that, the City obtained the rights to another eight percent of the money derived from sale of any gasoline distilled from the oil.  Of the City of Los Angeles' 14 leased oil sites, only Venice and Rancho Park are located on City property, entitling the City to an owner's share of the revenues.

To understand how favorable this is to the City, you have to know that, for the oil sites in the City not on property owned by Los Angeles, the City is only entitled to a per-barrel wellhead tax.  The Venice 16 and 2/3 percent oil royalty alone is worth ten thousand times more than that to the City.  Because the oil pools tapped by Mobil from the one-acre site were within the coastal zone,  the State Lands Commission restricted the use of the funds to coastal-related expenditures.  The Commission reserved the right to approve of any expenditure over $50,000.  When revenues from the Mobil lease were received by the City, they went into a special account, the Beach Improvement Capital Account.   Twenty years ago, in the days when Jack Kerouak was writing beat fiction in Venice and the beat café, the Gas House, was being leveled to bring Venice "up to code".   Mayor Sam Yorty took NONE of the City's responsibilities under the Tidelands Trust and restricted $1.65 million of the $1.9 million, Mobil bonus, to "development, maintenance and improvement of beaches".   Yorty wrote the Parks and Recreation Department that "the City has a policy of investing such revenues in the properties from which the oil was extracted."
   
That was good news for Venice, which in 1965 was in the trough of a long decline begun, not surprisingly, by the discovery of significant deposit of oil in the Venice-Marina area in 1929. Anyway, from the first $1.9 million, Venice Beach was allocated $893,000 with the remainder going to other Los Angeles City Beaches.  Before long, the first of many transfers of monies intended for Venice occurred, when $304,000 of the Venice allocation was subtracted and given instead to the construction of the Cabrillo Fishing Pier.   © Patrick McCartney
   
Oil Revenue Research on Venice Beach Oil Site Research by Arnold, Carol, Charles….etc. (Venice Town Council)
1911-1919:  Introduction to submerged and Tidelands. 
Los Angeles is trusted for about 40 square miles of these lands in Santa Monica and San Pedro.  Lands in Santa Monica are under Parks and Rec.  Whereas San Pedro lands are under control of three agencies:  Parks and Rec., City Council, and Harbor Commission. Section #45 of L.A. City Charter imposes specific limitation on expenditure of funds derived from State Tidelands, mostly for Harbor.  L.A. gets Venice lands April 10, 1917, amended by statute in 1945.

1945: Chapter 1513 amends Act of 1917 pertaining to former City of Venice. Gives lands to City of L.A. for among other things: "improvement, construction, and use of, and for parks, playgrounds, streets, boulevards, bathers, bath houses and beaches."  This grant, however, excepted any property held under, through, or from a Mexican grant or patent within the boundaries and jurisdiction of the said former City of Venice.      For land off San Pedro, all trust monies had to be used for commerce, navigation and fisheries.  In Santa Monica Bay, in addition, the City may also develop its lands for recreation, i.e. the construction of beach facilities, bathing houses, access roads, etc.

Dec. 1960: Ocean Front Walk replaced with asphalt: $12,240. Petroleum Administrator reported that Venice has 90 oil and gas wells producing 223,920 barrels per year.

June 1962:  Council approves oil and gas lease to Standard Oil on Oakwood playground. It is called Brooks Oil and Gas Lease.  Standard is signing up owners in about 212 acres to drill for oil and gas. Parks & Rec. move to establish under oil drilling district.

June 18, 1962: Councilman charges that many of the proposed improvements under the Tideland Bond Act have not been completed and that much of the bond fund may have been frozen indefinitely for other purposes.

July 1962:  1957 Bond Fund monies still not spent.  Parks and Rec. refuses to present timetable for future expenditures.  City Council had requested itemized breakdown of funds expended on projects and list of future projects.    

Figures showed Venice got $1,833,000 out of $23 million spent by Parks and Rec.  $2 million was still unencumbered and $14 million in bonds was still not issued. The Venice monies from 1957 Park Bond Fund went for:   1) 19 Senior Citizen Recreation Centers; 2) Lagoon Park development; 3) parking lot; 4) equipment;   5) landscaping;    6) Recreation Parking;   7) Beach Walk;  8) Lifeguard Headquarters;   9) South Beach Service facility;  10)  Sanitary conveniences;  11)   Groin reconstruction. These were termed projects completed.

Aug. 1963:  City Council approves urban oil drilling district for Standard Oil on Oakwood playground.

Jan. 19, 1965:  City Council approves four Standard Oil drilling districts in Oakwood and authorizes Union Oil drilling district for Venice Beach.

April 1965:  Capital projects proposed in Venice from Oil Bonus Fund.  TOTAL - $893,000    Cabrillo Beach allocated $100,000

April 1965: City accepts Socony-Mobil offer for Oil and Gas lease #135 for Venice. (next to Venice Pavilion. Editor)

April 1965: $404,000 allocated for construction of Cabrillo Fishing Pier; $439,000 allocated to Cornell, Bridges and Trolier to prepare
master beach plan; $36,600 for refurbishing of Venice Pavilion. (Which never happened!  Editor)

May 1965: City invests $1,500,000 from Oil Bonus Fund in Treasury Bills, maturing August 1965 at 3.7%.
June 1965 L.A. City Council adopts disbursement schedule of Socony-Mobil grant:   TOTAL:  $1,650,000

"The Board of Parks and Rec. no longer had a policy under which oil revenues recovered from public properties should be used for further capital improvements in the form of land acquisition or development."

June 1965:  Final discussion on extension of Venice Fishing Pier.  Both City and State are considering a new pier at a different location "to disperse a greater number of piers along the coastline, to allow greater public access and minimize traffic problems in area."  Total cost of initial project: $874,000.

Aug. 24, 1965: Joint Committee on Tidelands writes to Arthur Spaulding that the committee's studies show that "the terms and purposes of tidelands trusts in Calif. are extremely diverse.  Some are carefully drawn…and others are vague and tend to impede development of the subject lands because of uncertainties about…disposition of funds…"  It proposes new legislation to bring about uniformity and stability of administration over tide and submerged lands held in trust.   (Rip off starts here. Editor)

Oct.  1965:   Jesse Unruh supports Tidelands Bill.  Critical of use of tideland oil funds by City of L.A. Establishes strict accountability by Auditor General and State Lands Commission.  Any expenditure of $50,000 must be approved by State, 60 days prior to expenditure, by State Lands Commission.

Nov.  1965: Venice Planning Committee recommends against spending any monies on Venice Fishing Pier because of traffic problem area.  Parks and rec. gives OK to the deletion.

Dec. 10, 1965:  Mayor Yorty's office understands that $1,650,000 was "restricted by terms of the original trust to the development, maintenance, and improvement of beaches.  City has policy of investing such revenues in the properties from which the oil was extracted, as in the case of the beach oil revenues.”

Jan.26, 1966: Mayor Yorty advises Financial Committee of Parks and Rec. That a portion of oil revenues is included in Depts budget to partially finance operating expenses.   (Here we go. Ed)

The policy to use part of these funds for operating expenses started in 1959-60 budget. The City Council in Dec. 1965 wanted the Dept. to restrict use of these oil funds to finance capital developments and improvements in park system.  Parks and Rec. rejected this proposal and refused to be pinned down.

June 1966: City Council adopts Park and Rec. recommendation for allocation of funds giving $893,000 to Venice.

Aug.1 1966: Park and Rec. agrees to turn $404,000 over to Cabrillo Fishing Pier. The State Wildlife Conservation Board to pay other half.

Oct. 1966 Petroleum Administrator reports in annual report that "the 1966 discovery of oil beneath the City's leased lands at Venice by Mobil should have an important bearing on City's oil and gas income in 1967 and later years." Venice well was
producing 573 barrels per day, and a second well was producing 500 barrels per day. (1964-65: $13,470,000   1965-66:$13,800,000)

Dec. 1966:  City Attorney Arnebergh writes to Braude that oil funds at Venice "could also be used for the maintenance and operation of improvements and facilities related to the trust
purposes."  Tidelands funds, he says, cannot be used for the general operating purposes of Parks and Rec.  Purposes have to be at beach and have a statewide public significance.

Dec.  1966:  State Wildlife Conservation Board against expansion of Venice Fishing Pier.  City and State enter into joint agreement to finance Cabrillo Fishing pier using $404,000 of Socony-Mobil bonus. Parks and Rec. establishes major items should be lifeguard headquarter building at Venice

Prior to Dec. 1967:  Venice originally allocated $893,000 from oil bonus monies.  Subsequently, $304,000 was given to Cabrillo Fishing Pier leaving a balance of $489,000. (PKM note: If this is the difference in Venice amount, figures are off by $100,000)

April 13, 1967: Board of Parks and Rec. agrees to split revenues from gas and oil lease off Hyperion with Dept. of Public Works.  Agreement approved by State Lands Commission.

June 29, 1967: Dept. of Public Works and Parks and Rec accept gas/oil lease #137 from Standard Oil for bonus of $1,078,000.00   Terms: 
             1. 16  2/3% of all oil and natural gas sold to city
             2.  8% of all gasoline sold
             3.  3 years to commence drilling
             4.  30% to Board of Public Works. 
             5   70% to Parks and Rec. from bonus monies.

Mar 19 1972:  Clark Brown of Venice visits Pat Russell asking how Venice Oil monies are spent.  Councilwoman Russell writes to Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, and says that many people want to know what happened to Venice Oil monies.  He pointed
Out that the San Pedro lease is quite strict and so recreation uses, such as a museum, could probably not be built with oil revenue monies.  The Venice grant is more lenient.  This got Bernardi going and he got the money for Cabrillo (Museum).  The Venice lease, as amended in 1945, gave L.A. extraordinary leeway in leasing. The Commerce and Maritime Museum in Cabrillo is Oked, however.  No monies can be put into a public improvement fund.  The Trust "does not authorize a city to use monies or the income from such monies for strictly local improvements."  Lands granted in Venice may be used for recreational beach facilities.

April  1974:  Parks and Recreation asks State Lands Commission to approve transfer of funds for Cabrillo Museum development.  According to the letter, "funds previously approved for demolition of Lick Pier were transferred to Cabrillo, and were replaced by transfers from smaller accounts from other tidelands oil funds.  Of the projects dropped, 1 restroom on the peninsula estimated at $93,830 had its funds removed.   Phase #1 monies savings from phase #2 and #3 given to Cabrillo.  ©  Venice Town Council

My Friend's Place - for Homeless Youth

My Friend's Place assists and inspires homeless youth to build self- sufficient lives. 

In 1988,  an entertainment executive initiated a volunteer-led, mobile meal program to distribute sack lunches to the homeless youth in the Hollywood community. Soon the volunteers built trust with the young people and realized that youth are driven to the streets by abuse, abandonment and neglect by families and caregivers. The needs and challenges of homeless youth go well beyond the critical condition of hunger.

Two years later, the volunteer group first opened the doors of a facility they called My Friend's Place and began to add social services and creative opportunities to their services. Today, My Friend's Place is the most frequently visited drop-in Resource Center for homeless youth in Southern California serving 1,000 youth ages 12 and over and their children, each year.

In collaboration with the leading social service providers and educational institutions in the region and over 200 volunteers, we offer a free comprehensive continuum of care that combines emergency necessities with therapeutic, health and education services through three program areas:

We are the only Resource Center for homeless youth in Los Angeles providing drop-in services seven days a week.  We are not government or religiously affiliated.  We are 100% privately funded.  We are the most visited Resource Center for homeless youth in Southern California.  Low barrier service structure: We minimize the psychological, physical, and social barriers that typically deter youth from seeking and accepting assistance from a social service agency.   Harm reduction approach: We provide education and support so youth can reduce harm caused by high risk behaviors associated with street survival.  http://myfriendsplace.org

  

JOIN 4-TIME GRAMMY AWARD WINNER
EDWIN HAWKINS

IN HIS APPEAL TO RAISE FUNDS  
FOR AMERICA’S HOMELESS

Donate $10 online and download a copy of Edwin Hawkins’   “People In Need” (PIN) song  
www.myspace.com/edwinhawkins


or send $15.00 check/money order

The Benefit Network/PIN Fund
P O Box 1952  Venice CA 90294

Deadline for each issue is 25th of the month.
Email articles, poems, etc. in Word .doc format and
pictures/photos in .jpg format  as attachments.
Thank you!

* * * * * * * *
Deadline for each issue is 25th of the month.
Email articles, poems, etc. in Word .doc format and
pictures/photos in .jpg format  as attachments.
Thank you!

Another Project of The Benefit Network

Best Buy Electronics