Image: Oktoberfest on Front Street, the first event in the Front Street Entertainment Zone. Image via Downtown San Francisco.
Correction: An earlier version of this article mentioned details of proposed police expenditures that were put in an original draft as parody but in future drafts the parody was removed but the listings remained. We regret the error.
Does Santa Monica Want to Be a Fun City?
What city doesn’t want to be thought of as a “fun” place to live or work? I would bet very few, but over the past decade, in part due to budget issues and in part due to curmudgeon issues, Santa Monica has slowly become a less fun place to be.
Santa Monica Coast, the popular open-streets event? Too costly.
Pier concert series? SMPD says they create liability.
4th of July fireworks at SMC? Also a casualty to the ever-present budget scissors.
Heck, even the small fun runs on the beach path have been priced out due to a costly permit process (the runs themselves have moved south to Long Beach and Venice which doesn’t have as costly a permit process)
In the last two elections, a younger (and perhaps more fun) city council has risen to power with only one member being older than me.*** Hope was high that these political newcomers would create policies that focused on creating fun for everyone. Two weeks ago was the first test, when the staff brought a watered down entertainment zone proposal for a vote. So far the council is passing.
In California, an “entertainment zone” is a designated public area (sidewalks, streets, or plaza) where restaurants or bars can sell to-go alcoholic beverages for consumption within the zone’s boundaries. Front Street in San Francisco is the state’s first, and only, entertainment zone. Entertainment zones were first made legal in California in 2023.
Last fall, the City Council directed staff to come back with a proposal on how the city could create an entertainment zone for sections of the Promenade. They wanted details on the costs, how other cities across North America have dealt with complications that might arise, and an idea on whether or not businesses and the surrounding community would support such a concept. Council was hoping for a resolution that would create an entertainment zone quickly so the city could move forward.
The city came back with a proposal on how to do a limited series of special events annually citing the cost of increased overtime as a barrier to a program similar to the one already in place in San Francisco (who has somehow managed to do the program without costing taxpayers millions of dollars.)
The report was widely panned, and given that San Francisco is so excited about the success of Front Street they announced five new entertainment zones last month, the staff proposal felt more than a little tone deaf. The SMPD proposed four police officers per block where the entertainment zone was in place.
To be fair to staff, the San Francisco entertainment zone is not a year-round, everyday place, but is similar to the initial proposal of a series of special events. The city is already seeing some drawbacks to a limited permit-based system and is seeking to change the process. So while staff might have based their proposal on the only other entertainment zone in the state, that’s not the proposal that the Council asked for last year.
The Council wisely sent staff back to the drawing board with direction, again, to create a resolution that would create a full-time entertainment zone that would be funded by permits or fees by the businesses that would directly benefit from the proposal. The Council envisions a seven-day-a-week program from 8 am to 2 am, but the final details will be voted on at a future meeting.
While the motion last fall received scant attention from the media both locally and regionally, with much of the attention needlessly negative. For example, a Daily Press article covering a meeting of Downtown Santa Monica Inc., a business association led with the headline, “DTSM Board urges caution on alcohol-allowed Promenade plan.” According to people present at the meeting, comments from the boardmembers unanimously supported the program and most wanted to see it expanded beyond the Promenade.
As a matter of fact, the CEO of Downtown Santa Monica Inc had this unambiguous response when asked about the entertainment zone proposal by KTLA.
“I think it’s a great idea,” said Andrew Thomas, CEO of Downtown Santa Monica Inc. “I think it’s the biggest thing that’s happened to the promenade since the promenade was built.”
The Daily Press also published a pair of opinion pieces opposing the program. One of them was really weird. I’ll let you figure out which one.
So while the establishment media is amplifying the concerns of the curmudgeons, the program is moving forward with the full support of the Council and the business community.
And while those hoping that Santa Monica will once again be known as a fun place to be (outside of the pier and beaches…I mean everyone thinks those are fun) have gotten their first win in years. There’s still a lot of work to be done before the city is truly “fun again.”
*** The one member who is clearly older than me is Barry Snell. According to people that know us both, he is at least as fun as me and probably much more fun. I’m not sure how old Mayor Lana Negrete is, we’re probably in the same generation at least. I leave the question of our comparative funness up to you.
