April 24, 2024
Dear Landmarks Commission,
The Working Group on Social Jus?ce/Equity in Preserva?on is pleased to present its final report en?tled: A Place for Everyone in Santa Monica’s History. The culmina?on of a two-year partnership between the CRJ Housing CommiPee and a subcommiPee of the Landmarks Commission as requested by City Council, the report outlines the research and procedures undertaken and lists several substan?ve recommenda?ons for ensuring social equity in the course of implementa?on of the Santa Monica Landmarks Ordinance.
The Working Group thanks the many listening session par?cipants whose thoughSul responses are at the core of the recommenda?ons, and the City of Santa Monica for its support.
The Working Group requests that the Landmarks Commission endorse the report at its mee?ng on May 13, 2024, and forward it to the City Council with a request for immediate ac?on on the recommenda?ons.
Sincerely,
The Working Group on Social Jus?ce/Equity in Preserva?on Tara Barauskas, CRJ Housing CommiPee
Dolores Sloan, Landmarks Commissioner
___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 1
A PLACE FOR EVERYONE IN SANTA MONICA’S HISTORY
___________________________________________________________________________
1. Establishment of a Working Group
On September 13, 2021, a Landmark nomina6on came before the Landmarks Commission describing the architectural significance of 1665 Appian Way, a 100-year-old fourplex near Santa Monica’s beachfront. As the hearing progressed, new research was provided which described racist ac6vi6es perpetrated by a man who was the builder, owner, and long-term resident of the structure. His ac6vi6es were directly associated with that address. AMer discussing what role, if any, this informa6on should play in its delibera6ons, the Landmarks Commission voted 4-3 to designate the structure for its architectural significance with no reference to the social injus6ce that occurred there. The property owner, wishing to demolish the structure and proceed with a replacement project, appealed the designa6on to City Council. At a hearing on June 19, 2022, City Council reversed the designa6on and gave the following addi6onal direc6on:
Mo#on by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Mayor Himmelrich, to direct the Landmarks Commission to work with the Commi<ee for Racial Jus#ce and other groups within town, to try and come up with some criteria and framework for addressing these kinds of issues when they arise in the future, so that we will have a standardized way of dealing with these unfortunate situa#ons. Also implied direc#on that would include having the Landmarks Commission appoint one or two liaisons to the Commi<ee for Racial Jus#ce and other groups in the city as well. The vote was unanimously approved by voice vote, with all members present.
At its next mee6ng, the Landmarks Commission formed a subcommiTee, which immediately established a partnership with the CommiTee for Racial Jus6ce. The resul6ng Working Group on Social Jus6ce/Equity in Preserva6on (Working Group) met regularly for nearly two years to develop recommenda6ons to City Council and the Landmarks Commission to inform decisionmaking when structures and sites come before them with histories rela6ng to the city’s underrepresented groups and vic6ms of discrimina6on, and to ensure that the histories of all Santa Monica’s residents are considered in its delibera6ons.
2. Defining Santa Monica Historic Narra@ve Types Related to Social Jus@ce Early discussions of the Working Group considered a list of narra6ve types likely to emerge in Santa Monica history which fall under the provenance of social jus6ce/equity and could require ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 2
special aTen6on by the Landmarks Commission through both discussion and ac6on. The possible narra6ves include, but are not limited to, the following:
• An associa6on with a heroic, local leader, community builder, or group that has impacted their local community or the city as a whole, and is/are member(s) of a historically underrepresented group; or
• an associa6on with a building, place, or event associated with impact on the community of a historically underrepresented group, or the growth and development of Santa Monica as a whole; or
• recovery of lost narra6ves about people, pioneers, places, and ins6tu6ons significant to groups underrepresented in tradi6onal historical narra6ves about Santa Monica; or
• an associa6on with individuals who are members of underrepresented groups in the face of personally directed racism or discrimina6on; or • an associa6on with individuals who are members of underrepresented groups in the face of racism or discrimina6on that directly advanced ingrained racist or discriminatory systems (i.e., land taken by the City of Santa Monica through racially mo6vated eminent domain to cause, preserve, or intensify segrega6on, thus requiring remedia6on, and reconcilia6on); or
• proper6es that meet any of the landmark designa6on criteria based on architectural or other merit, and also have tangen6al associa6on with a racism or discrimina6on (i.e., race restric6on in its deed, in a red-lined area, or built by a person with known racist associa6on who never occupied the site); or
• proper6es that meet any of the landmark designa6on criteria based on architectural or other merit and are also directly associated with the perpetra6on of racist or discriminatory acts.
Some of the narra6ve types above could be celebrated for their posi6ve associa6ons, such as those connected with heroic figures or resilience in the face of the challenges of ins6tu6onal racism. For some narra6ves, the pain they represent would need to be weighed against the value of illustra6ng how systemic harm becomes established. Others are related to places that are one of many that share broad nega6ve associa6ons, oMen citywide, without individual significance to the par6cular site, and thus may not require any special considera6on. ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 3
3. Merging Preserva@on and Social Jus@ce Goals
The goals of the city’s historic preserva6on program are educa6onal at their core, a “conversa6on with our past about the future,” as the Na6onal Trust for Historic Preserva6on describes it. This conversa6on tells us who we are and where we come from. Telling truthful stories from history presents an opportunity to interpret what has come before, understand how it impacts us today, and presents an opportunity for repara6ve improvement in the future.
There is a similar educa6onal component in the effort to further social jus6ce. A socially just society has learned to recognize exclusionary and discriminatory prac6ces that have been built into systems and conven6ons. It understands how they were put into place, works to unravel them by learning to recognize the warning signs when new discriminatory prac6ces are developing, and works to dismantle and repair past racist ac6ons. A socially just society also fights against neo racism by recognizing that ac6ons that strive to repair past discrimina6on are not discriminatory. Historic preserva6on can play a role in all of that.
The Working Group discussed the following ac6ons that facilitate posi6ve social jus6ce outcomes, and how they are synergis6c with the lessons that emerge through historic preserva6on.
• Recognize the presence of underrepresented people and honor their contribu6ons from all 6me periods and backgrounds.
• Define race as a social, poli6cal, and/or economic construct based on superficial physical characteris6cs, ancestry, historical affilia6on, or culture without biological meaning.
• Recognize and call aTen6on to White and other kinds of privilege where it is specifically engrained in systems and laws, as well as in personal beliefs. • Advocate for non-discriminatory laws, policies and public safety enforcement. • Conduct ongoing self-examina6on as a community and as individuals to chip away at learned, some6mes unconscious, discriminatory behaviors.
While, as noted, some narra6ves foster empathy, pride, and posi6ve reinforcement to people and groups whose stories are represented, other narra6ves, with or without poten6al educa6onal value in furtherance of social jus6ce, could cons6tute an excessive retelling of terrible events that force individuals or groups who have suffered from discrimina6on to relive past pain. The following ques6ons could be useful during ac6ve analysis of certain historic narra6ves through a social jus6ce lens:
___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 4
• Is the narra6ve from the perspec6ve of compassion or aggression? • Does the narra6ve engender empathy or anger?
• Is an associa6on with nega6ve figures a factor even if racist ac6ons did not occur on the subject property?
• Is other significance so great that loss of the resource for nega6ve associa6ons leaves a gap in the overall narra6ve of Santa Monica history as reflected by its register of designated historic resources?
• Is any men6on of a nega6ve figure found to be associated with a historic resource necessary to convey its significance or can they be omiTed altogether? • Do par6cular harmful ac6ons by nega6ve figures have a direct or a tangen6al associa6on with the site?
• Is there value to the narra6ve in advancing our understanding how specific events led to systemic racism in Santa Monica in specific ways and how to work against it? • Is the narra6ve integral to Santa Monica’s history in par6cular? • Are impacts of the narra6ve are s6ll felt in the city today? • Can language for findings can be craMed that neither glorifies nor excuses discriminatory ac6ons?
• Would omiing a narra6ve that reveals a nega6ve figure in local history excuse them or allow embedded racism to stay buried?
• Does the narra6ve foster empathy, pride, posi6ve reinforcement, or is it an excessive retelling of terrible events?
4. Listening Sessions
The Working Group concluded that the next step would be to bring these ideas into the community for discussion. A protocol was developed for listening sessions with groups of Santa Monicans that have been underrepresented in local historical narra6ves, and the applica6on of the Landmarks Ordinance as a result of long imbedded White privilege that led to an imbalance in our understanding of historic significance. The goal of the listening sessions was to allow the knowledge, experience, and feelings of par6cipants from historically underrepresented groups to further develop the ideas. To ensure the comfort and safety of the par6cipants, there are no audio recordings of the sessions. Instead, careful note taking assured memory of individual contribu6ons, while redac6ng personally iden6fying details. Each session began with a brief ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 5
overview for the par6cipants of the landmark designa6on purpose and process. They were then invited to tell about places in Santa Monica that are significant to them or others in the group or culture they represented. They learned about the contested landmark designa6on that led to the forma6on of the Working Group and were asked what they would have done were they on the Landmarks Commission. Most, but not all par6cipants directly addressed the ques6on about the handling of difficult histories.
The nomina6on that triggered the crea6on of the Working Group turned out to be an ideal “case study” of the problem for the purposes of discussion by assuming that its architectural significance is a given and then layering in the racist narra6ve and its aspects related to the establishment of ins6tu6onalized racism in Santa Monica. Seven listening sessions took place.
Following are descrip6ons encapsula6ng each.
Human Rights Council
January 26, 2023
A discussion with members of the Human Rights Council in a video conference call revolved around uncovering and preserving underrepresented histories, finding appropriate ways to recognize new kinds of historic sites, understanding whether highligh6ng a place through designa6on is going to be harmful or beneficial, if other forms of recogni6on may be more suitable in some cases, and how to determine instances when no ac6on should be taken.
Speakers raised concerns about the poten6al demoli6on of architecturally significant landmarks that meet criteria because of a parallel but unrelated history, emphasizing the importance of not overlooking stories but also preserving significant buildings. They suggested comparing the impacts of designa6on and demoli6on and emphasized the importance of understanding both sides of stories and mo6ves. They highlighted the value of preserving stories as warnings.
Japanese Americans
March 4, 2023
Through most of this video conference call discussion, the eight par6cipants focused on places significant to Japanese life in Santa Monica. Several came from families that had been deeply involved in the Nikkei Kai (community center), and some par6cipants or family members had been incarcerated in Manzanar. Some and members of their families are or have been leaders in the cultural and religious life of Santa Monica’s Japanese community. They ranged from an elder scien6st who has par6cipated in significant American events to a teenager who created a game featuring historic Westside Japanese loca6ons or proper6es. All were notably accomplished people successful in their work or the community. Par6cipants suggested the ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 6
development of digital tours to document Japanese American communi6es in Santa Monica in addi6on to landmarks, and the importance of educa6ng the younger genera6on about this history, which is overlooked in schools. Discussion suggested several sites that could be highlighted in historic districts or cultural presenta6ons.
Californio & Early Santa Monica Mexicans
March 7, 2023
An in-person conversa6on began with the three par6cipants sharing places in Santa Monica that are significant to their families or culture. One par6cipant grew up in the Pico Neighborhood, where homes of family members were lost when the Interstate 10 was constructed. Another grew up in the Broadway Neighborhood. All went to Saint Anne’s School. The par6cipants discussed the difficul6es in preserving historic places in their neighborhoods of origin that have been altered or are modest. When asked about the balance between architectural significance and problema6c histories, they agreed that each case should be evaluated individually. They agreed that historic places are important for understanding people; even if the stories are challenging, they are an opportunity for awareness. They noted that documenta6on alone cannot replace the loss of a historic place so leing one go should be carefully considered, but generally a really good example of a type of architecture should outweigh other history.
Asian and Pacific Islanders
Various dates in September 2023
Five par6cipants responded to two ques6ons sent by email. The first ques6on asked how difficult or painful stories should be handled in the course of landmark designa6on. Three respondents said that Landmark designa6on should generally be approved on a case-by-case basis that weighs the severity of the racist associa6on. Such designa6ons should acknowledge discriminatory associa6ons because knowledge of history, which is not always posi6ve, can help prevent future harm. Two respondents leaned more towards disapproving such designa6ons but also felt that the Landmarks Commission should take advantage of any poten6al teaching opportuni6es from the history of the site through other forms of documenta6on. The second ques6on asked them to name sites significant to their families or culture. Respondents were able to list a number of them but noted that liTle research exists on the AAPI community in Santa Monica and that they would like to learn more about it. ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 7
Familias La@nas Unidas
October 6, 2023
At an in-person mee6ng of thirteen members of the Familias La#nas Unidas in Virginia Avenue Park, a Spanish/English interpreter ensured everyone could follow the discussion. Par6cipants shared their personal connec6ons to the city, and generally agreed it is important to preserve historic places. Experiences ranged from displacement due to freeway construc6on to sadness over the loss of the Casillas Market which also served as a social hub. Most par6cipants are ac6ve in church and school groups and value the opportunity to live in Santa Monica while following the cultural and family tradi6ons they grew up with. The resilience and resourcefulness of the La6no community led to a deep connec6on to Virginia Avenue Park as a sacred space that symbolizes the successful efforts of their community in addressing youth violence and reopening the park as a safe place for families. Highly emo6onal tes6monies underscored the importance of preserving not just physical landmarks but also the memories, pain and resilience embedded in the community's history. The discussion provided several significant loca6ons as poten6al historic memory sites.
The Black Experience
September 21, 2023 (one-on-one)
November 27, 2023 (group and one-on-one)
December 5, 2023 (group and one-on-one)
FiMeen par6cipants contributed their thoughts in a variety of seings designed to encourage greater par6cipa6on. There was general agreement that Santa Monica is grappling with an impera6ve to address racial equality and the displacement of Black residents from historic neighborhoods. Many places significant to Santa Monica’s Black history were lost due to past erasures. Most stressed the need for unwavering support for policies, programs and prac6ces that ac6vely promote racial equity, with a strong emphasis on recognizing Black individuals as equals, beginning with meaningful representa6on at the point where decision-making is taking place. At this juncture in the considera6on process, an6-racism must enter the efforts, guided by diversity, equity and inclusion. This extends to efforts addressing the ongoing dispari6es caused by systemic racism. Recognizing and addressing the harm caused by an6-Black racism is pivotal for the collec6ve well-being of all.
5. Final Recommenda@ons
The main takeaway from the seven listening sessions was that everyone wants their story to be told, and most already know places that would help tell it. There was some concern about how ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 8
it would be possible to recognize these places using current guidelines, given the loss of integrity of many of the remaining resources that could have significant associa6ons. Many places and en6re communi6es in Santa Monica where par6cipant families had tradi6onally lived are already erased, perhaps lending heightened significance to remaining resources that may be in poor or altered condi6on. Everyone that addressed it explicitly agreed that some difficult stories need to be told and others are just to terrible to retell, though it was clear that line fell in a different place from person to person, group to group, culture to culture. Thus, the conclusion of the Working Group is that there can be no objec6ve “framework” that could lead to the proper handling of difficult narra6ves that emerge in the course of Landmark nomina6ons, and in Santa Monica’s history, there are many lost and buried stories that we must work hard to discover and share.
Therefore, the Working Group recommends the following ac6ons:
• Update the Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory and Context Statement so they more deeply reflect the history of Santa Monica’s underrepresented communi6es and iden6fy extant historic places that may help tell their stories. • Ensure that landmark nomina6ons, and/or the reports that analyze them take a much closer look into owners and occupants of proposed landmarks to learn more about the people associated with our historic places because it is in the people that the stories reside.
• Create Santa Monica guidelines for interpreta6on of the City’s Landmark Designa6on Criteria and evalua6on of historic integrity to assist applicants, decision makers, and others ac6ve in the process, and include special guidance on how to uncover and interpret the history of previously underrecognized groups. • Seek and retain outside consultants from diverse popula6ons or those with training and/or background in awareness of history and popula6on movements of unrepresented groups in Santa Monica.
• Establish a commiTee of diverse community members to be advisory to the Landmarks Commission on maTers related to social jus6ce and underrepresented narra6ves in local history. Structured similarly to the Third Street Historic District’s CPC, as an ad hoc group, or other similar construct to be determined, the Advisory CommiTee would be called into ac6on to meet and discuss relevant nomina6ons, such as those that include the narra6ve types in sec6on 2 of this report. The Advisory CommiTee, which would not need to come to a consensus, would submit a report to the Landmarks Commission prior to the public hearing on nomina6ons, lis6ng the range of views expressed about the proposed landmark. The Landmarks Commission will take this informa6on under advisement when making a ___________________________________________________________________________ Final Report from the Working Group on Social Jus:ce/Equity in Preserva:on to the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission and City Council May 2024 9
determina6on. Members of the Advisory CommiTee would receive a small s6pend for each mee6ng.
• Host a mee6ng/celebra6on with city-wide par6cipa6on to ini6ate the programs recommended in this report and to increase awareness of the city’s historic preserva6on program among the diverse popula6ons of the city. Genera6ng interest in the program, the event will strive to inspire ac6ve par6cipa6on of new individuals and groups in the landmark nomina6on and designa6on process. • Provide professional training to Landmarks Commissioners and city staff that encourages personal growth through awareness of privilege and leads to an ability to recognize ideas and systems that are based on a non-inclusive world view.
The Working Group requests that the Landmarks Commission endorse the recommenda6ons in this report and forward them to City Council with a request that they give direc6on and funding for implementa6on. The Working Group will con6nue its work through the planning and implementa6on phase.
6. Working Group Members
Landmarks Commission Social Jus6ce/Equity in Preserva6on SubcommiTee:
Dolores Sloan (current)
Pam O’Connor (incoming)
Richard Brand (former)
Gloria Garvin (former)
Roger Genser (former)
CommiTee for Racial Jus6ce SubcommiTee:
Tara Barauskas
Joanne Berlin
Nina Fresco
Patricia Hoffman
Robbie Jones
Hajar Muqtasid St. Clair
Angela ScoT