Unashamed

   Paul DeSantis begins his letter to the editor (Letters to the editor, this page) scolding us for what he describes as “two serious factual errors which require printed corrections.”
   First, he censures us for “falsely” stating VERITAS’s position on candidates’ residency requirements. In fact, we got our information directly from the VERITAS website which clearly shows that VERITAS would reduce the residency requirement for candidates from two years, as stated in the City Charter, to 30 days. What the website does not show is the footnote in the Charter which states that the residency requirement is already 30 days, owing to a 1975 California Supreme Court case.
   DeSantis says, “The 30 day residency requirement has been law in California for 26 years. This is clearly stated on the City’s web site under Charter Section ‘601. Eligibility.’” Why, then, is it not clearly stated on the VERITAS website?
   Shame on VERITAS for excluding the vital footnote.
   He goes on to say, “A correction and apology are required.” We agree. DeSantis owes his backers and Santa Monica voters a correction and apology for thoroughly muddling the issue.
   Moving right along, he says, “The second error is your statement that the VERITAS Mayor ‘would have executive as well as legislative powers.’ VERITAS retains the City Manager as our Chief Executive Officer. In order for the Mayor to become the Chief Executive Officer, one would need to take away the City Manager’s executive powers.”
   We did not say or even suggest that, under VERITAS, the mayor would become the city’s “Chief Executive Officer.” We said he or she would have both executive and legislative powers “as well as opening the door to every kind of collusion and co-optation.” And we stand by our statement.
   As the VERITAS initiative says, “The Mayor shall preside over all proceedings of the City Council, set proceedings agenda, have a voice in all proceedings…serve as the city council’s liason with the city manager…The Mayor shall supervise the City’s intergovernmental function.” Under VERITAS, the Mayor can also veto any ordinance. Sounds like executive/legislative powers to us.
   While scolding us for these two alleged “factual errors,” DeSantis says, “On the policy issues, we simply disagree,” thus relieving himself of the burden of addressing our more substantive criticisms of VERITAS, such as the notion that voting for two of eight elected officials (as VERITAS would have it) would somehow give a voter more power and influence than voting for all seven officials (as we do now).
   The Mirror has regularly expressed its displeasure with the performance of current elected and appointed offcials on a wide range of programs and projects, but the problem resides in the people we elect, not the way we elect them.
   Santa Monica does not need a new electoral process, it needs new, better and more diverse candidates for public office. As we have previously said, if the VERITAS proponents really wanted to make Santa Monica more democratic, they would have pushed for campaign reform, not a radical and pointless alteration of the electoral process.