[Editor’s Note: With the June 3 election, and voting on Prop. 98 and Prop. 99 barely one week away, here is the third and final part of an interview with Culver City business owner Les Surfas, who lost part of his property last year to an eminent domain claim from City Hall.]
In seeking to narrow the ability of government to claim private property through the disputed concept of eminent domain, businessman Les Surfas said that authors of this year’s attempt to pare down eminent domain have written a clearer resolution for the June 3 election than the last losing proposition, which appeared on the November of ’06 ballot.
“To me,” said Mr. Surfas, “Prop. 98 is a lot simpler and cleaner than Prop. 90 was. Bottom line is, you don’t take property to give to another individual. Secondly, 98 is against rent control. It’s no more complicated than that.”
In the process of clearing commercial land in mid-city to make room for the pending arrival of the Expo light rail line and surrounding accoutrements, City Hall and Mr. Surfas locked into a mammoth battle for one piece of his properties that faced each other across National Boulevard, near the corner of Washington.
Mr. Surfas, the personification of outspokenness with a grand, sweeping view of the world, is a black-and-white philosopher on electoral property issues.
He does not hesitate or equivocate.
With the next election seven days away, the owner of Surfas Restaurant Supply and Gourmet Foods speaks out as fiercely against rent control, the other target of Prop. 98, as he has for years now against eminent domain.
“In terms of rent control, the reason there are so few apartments to rent in the city of L.A. or Santa Monica is, who would ever build an apartment building if you can’t ever make any money out of them?
“I believe in supply-and-demand. It will work every time. The minute there is no rent control, there is going to be more apartments built. Within 10 years, there will be a surplus of apartments.
“There is a shortage because why would anyone even want to build an apartment today with all of the restrictions?”
Question: Will you approach the voting booth next Tuesday with vigor or in a more obligatory mood? Can a “yes” vote on 98 achieve serious good?
“With both propositions that we are voting on, the foundation of the country is involved — private property rights. That is what this country was founded on. If our forefathers knew what was going on, they would be in shock.
“I guess a year and a half ago when I was fighting so hard for Prop. 90, yes, I was certainly fighting for myself. And I was fighting some things with ex-City Council members who were saying ‘The only reason Les Surfas is fighting is that he wants more money (from the city in City Hall’s acquisition, or as he says “seizure,” of his warehouse property).’
“I thought that was an idiotic comment because there I was fighting to say, ‘Don’t take my property. I’ll knock my own building down and build what you want.’ If I was trying to get more money, as one ex-Councilman said, why would I say, ‘Don’t take my property’?
“Where I kind of got disenchanted was, somewhere toward the end of the voting in the fall of ’06 I figured out that most people didn’t understand the concept of the government taking your personal property.
“They all turned it into more of a circus, more of a ‘You’ll get your money.’ Or, I got responses like, ‘They are going to have to pay you for it.’
“I can’t tell you how many people I have spoken to, even attorneys, who don’t really comprehend my eminent domain case.
“Their first reaction is, ‘You should have gotten a good lawyer.’
Surfas Said He Came Armed
“Well, I had 3 or 4 very fine lawyers. I did not depend on one attorney. I was going to take it to the (U.S.) Supreme Court. However, I was guaranteed by the attorney that if I took it all the way to the Supreme Court, two things would happen.
“a) The city was sitting on my money, and they would have been able to freeze it. I would not have been able to get my money.
“b) (The city) would have had me out of my building because the way the law is written today, through eminent domain, once they say they want your building, they can have you out within 90 days, even if they have not proved the right to take it.
“A lot of my fight was not even about the taking as much as, ‘What is the hurry when I don’t have a place to move to?’ This proved to be correct because they knocked it down, and it’s sitting there. There is no developer for that property today (where his warehouse once stood, at the intersection of Washington and National boulevards).
“So what would it matter? I was just very fortunate, after a lot of hard work, that I found a location (at the end of Landmark Street) to move to.
“If I had not been able to find something close to my store, I would have closed the store.”
Question: What is your mood, your frame of mind, each morning when you walk into your new warehouse on Landmark, since, as you maintain, you were thrown off your own property?
“Well, I don’t dwell on it. But, since you asked me, that is exactly how I feel. I bought a building at the end of a dead-end street.
“By the time I was through, I paid every bit as much if not more, than the city paid me for being at an intersection. And I have a building that has a sub-tenant, below mark. And my mortgage is about four times as high as what I had before.
“So why don’t you ask me how I feel once a month when I make my mortgage payment?”
Question: You said that Prop. 99 was written to counter Prop. 98?
“Yes, to dilute it. To confuse people. Basically it says, they can’t take your home but they can take your business. What’s the difference?”
