|
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
|
VENICE RIPPED OFF FOR OVER A
MILLION
By
Patrick McCartney - Research
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
|
|
|