Venice Beach Boardwalk Curfew Draws Large Audience

A midnight to 5 a.m. curfew along Ocean Front Walk in Venice drew about 100 people to a Venice Neighborhood Council Neighborhood Committee meeting.

Nearly 100 people packed a meeting room in Oakwood Park on Monday night to learn more about a midnight curfew being implemented on the Venice Beach boardwalk.

The Venice Neighborhood Council's Neighborhood Committee invited Lt. Paola Kreefft, who overseas the Los Angeles Police Department's beach detail, and Arturo Pina, field deputy for Los Angeles City Councilman Bill Rosendahl, whose 11th Council District includes Venice.

At issue was the implementation of a midnight to 5 a.m. curfew along Ocean Front Walk that will be enforced as part of the city's recently amended ordinance to regulate vending on the boardwalk.

The standing-room-only crowd was polled by committee chairman Marc Salzberg and 63 people raised their hands in favor of the curfew enforcement to end overnight camping on Ocean Front Walk. Eighteen people said they disagreed with the curfew and another 18 said they did not have enough information.

Ira Koslow, a 40-year resident of Venice, likened the situation on the popular boardwalk to "Mad Max," the 1979 film starring Mel Gibson set in a dystopian future of lawlessness and anarchy.

Kreefft told the audience that an ordinance restricting beach access from midnight to 5 a.m. has been part of the city's municipal code since Jan. 8, 1989, but not enforced. The City Attorney's Office when considering the new vending ordinance determined that Ocean Front Walk was part of the Venice Beach park and subject to the curfew, Kreefft said.

The curfew would extend from the border with Santa Monica all the way south to El Segundo, Kreefft said. Residents will be allowed to walk to their homes and bar and restaurant patrons will be able to walk to parking lots, but dog walking and strolls on the beach won't be allowed.

Salzberg said he was concerned the curfew would lead more people to walk on the largely unlit Speedway thoroughfare just east of the boardwalk after leaving bars and restaurants, mixing pedestrians with auto traffic.

Pina said city documents dating back to the 1920s include the boardwalk as a park and that the city's Department of Recreation and Parks helped fund boardwalk improvements in the 1990s.

The city has been in "constant dialog" with the California Coastal Commission, which oversees coastal access throughout the state, Pina said.

Some residents expressed concerns that the curfew will push people from the boardwalk east into their carports and alleys on the walk-streets between Pacific Avenue and Speedway. Others felt that the curfew would punish law abiding citizens taking their dog out for a late walk.

One resident who said she practiced "earth-based spirituality" claimed the curfew would personally deprive her of access to the Pacific Ocean and its healing powers. She said access to Ocean Front Walk and the beach should not be restricted.

Others urged residents to contact the California Coastal Commission over their concerns to beach access.

Daniel Samakow, owner of Danny's Deli, the Canal Club and James' Beach near the boardwalk, acknowledged that the curfew enforcement wasn't perfect, but said it was worth trying.

"Ocean Front Walk is a treasure. Abbot Kinney gave it to us as a treasure," Samakow said. "We have to keep preserving it."

Some 16 million people visit Venice Beach annually and Samakow said the community has an obligation to make sure it's safe.

"When we invite these people to our community, we have an obligation to do whatever we can to provide safety for them," Samakow said.

Brad Neal, who said he has 50 tenants on the boardwalk, said the curfew wasn't perfect, but endorsed it.

"I can't tell you how many times we have incidences right off our building, waking up residents, threatening residents walking from their parking structure to the building," Neal said. "It just not safe."

The VNC's Neighborhood Committee voted 7-0 for the VNC board to consider an emergency action for the city to improve lighting on the walk-streets and Speedway. The committee voted down a request to ask the city to exempt Venice residents from ticketing for violating the curfew.

killerweed January 25, 2012 at 02:50 PM
The problem on OFW is the people who are doing bad things, not the people who are not doing bad things. This enforcement scheme is the pathetic result of the city (and those egging it on) not being able to tell the difference. Now it's going to be like what the NRA says: "When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns." On OFW, take away the law-abiding people and what do you have left? People who know about how cities work know that having more people out and about makes for a safer neighborhood, and we're going in exactly the wrong direction. Stupid, and sad.
David Ewing January 25, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Achtung!! Your papers, please! "Residents will be allowed to walk to their homes and bar and restaurant patrons will be able to walk to parking lots, but dog walking and strolls on the beach won't be allowed."
ConcernedforVenice January 26, 2012 at 04:21 AM
The Nazi reference is so weak and ignorant.
venicepower January 27, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Now who is protesting too much? "ConcernedforVenice" falls on his own sword here by claiming that a creative juxtaposition of words is a Reductio at Hitlerum fallacy. In doing so, he attacks the man for an interpretation that he himself conjures. Ad hominem attacks display the weakness and ignorance - or the connivance - of the attacker. They also comprise an essential component of Nazism. Ewing's comment exposes the ordinance's underlying fallacy: Injustice for all - including dogs - unless you look like or walk like a resident with a roof, and as long as you stay on the city sidewalk and off the state beach. Confused yet? What's really strange is that the City Attorney could instead adopt a universally accepted "No Loitering" rule, as other beach towns do. Duh. So why did he choose this novel approach - which is illegal both in the Coastal Zone and on city streets? What is he trying to prove? Or disprove? Proper enforcement, not improper law, is the key. How will a bad law improve enforcement which is already inadequate? When the legal pulpit is used as a nightstick, respect for law vanishes. The attackers won this round with the illegal beach closure. They also win yet another battle in the war of misunderstanding. Meanwhile, we all continue to suffer, with our beachfront residents in lockdown, our law-abiding homeless lumped with criminals and our freedoms taken away.
venicelocal January 29, 2012 at 04:37 PM
The people selling shit think it is their space when really its public property any real citizens tries to sell and gets beat up by 30 Mexicans / south Americans .. some don't even speak English. Try to call the cops and 30 witnesses against you saying yummy attacked 1st.. Americans dont own this country anymore. The police don't wanna hear this cause they are mostly Hispanic too.
venicelocal January 29, 2012 at 04:41 PM
The beach is one huge drug trade at night. And when people are trading drugs others get robbed killed or stolen from. Hence all the crime on the beach. Fill the beach with tweekerrs and this is what you get
ConcernedforVenice January 29, 2012 at 07:34 PM
The only Ad Hominem going on here is that people who can't accept change in Venice seem to always fall back on a Hitler reference. It's predictable, entirely inaccurate. and offensive to all. Perhaps you need a refresher Logic 101 course to get your fallacies straight.
catman January 29, 2012 at 11:58 PM
The Nazi comparisons in reference to what has been going on in Venice the past couple of years are entirely accurate. Its a comparison that should be brought up often. Don't let the Nazis in this town try and shut you up just because you don't hate the homeless and aren't afraid to call them out on their Nazi tactics. That's how these cretins win.
venicepower February 05, 2012 at 06:40 PM
What is inaccurate is to assume that abridging freedom for the many justifies catering to the perception of safety for the few and easier land development for the fewer. Yes, perception: Every person who frequents the length of OFW knows the actual "ground zero" of the safety issue. Taken on its face, the decision of the City Attorney and City Council redefines the term "creative ignorance." The action tells the world that, in this town's creamery, the crumbs rise to the top. But to take this law on its face is to deny the truth. Truth says that the city can easily round up this issue's evildoers and leave residents alone. Truth says that failure to perform this task for well over two years - compromising residents' safety while planning a "beach takeover" ordinance, is unconscionable. It is also illegal. Enforcing a no-loitering ordinance from 6-9 a.m. is not.
Dawn Taylor November 04, 2012 at 07:59 PM
The laws have become ridiculous no dogs on the beach or boardwalk. Dogs and the beach go together. You can't smoke either or risk a huge ticket. Venice beach is not the relaxed place you knew it to be. Police harass everyone and you can risk arrest if you fall asleep on a tree, a really talented guy that sings on the beach was arrested after he fell asleep after performing he lives in an apt a few blocks down the road. This beach is under police rule and it's not fun we never go to the beach as we don't want to leave our dogs behind. If you notice there is hardly anyone on the beach anymore only a few surfers.
Dawn Taylor November 04, 2012 at 08:01 PM
Also it's not a huge drug trade lol the most the people do out there is smoke herb. This isn't a drug haven like you make it out to be venicelocal.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something