Abolishing R1 Zoning = Retaliation and Envy

The vestiges of discrimination associated with R1 zoning, e.g., restrictive-deed covenants, were long-ago made illegal and unenforceable. Now, to say that R1 zoning causes non-permitted discrimination is not correct. It’s as logical as guilt by former association.

Under a capitalist system, people usually have to pay for what they get. If you cannot afford to buy property in Beverly Hills, you do not qualify to buy property in Beverly Hills. The only color that counts is green. Many of us worked hard and have been lucky to secure our homesteads in Culver City. We paid for what we bought—R1 zoning.

To abolish R1 zoning based on the assumption that it supports non-permitted discrimination reeks of retaliation and envy. There is no evidence that abolishing R1 zoning leads to more affordable housing. There is no magic bullet. The City Council cannot repeal the laws of economics. Further, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Please recall that the good people of South-Central Los Angeles and East Los Angeles (our former neighbors) have long-had R1 zoning. They do not seek to abolish it. The Christian, Filipino, Italian, Jewish, Korean, Mexican, Okinawan and Taiwanese neighbors on our short block want to keep our R1 zoning. Would some members of the City Council consider us as racists or people who are too dense to understand?  

Some members of the City Council should think about the community angst they are causing for no legitimate purpose.

— Paulette & Les Greenberg 

Culver City 

The opinions expressed in Letters to the Editor and Opinion pieces do not reflect the opinions of the Culver City News. If you would like to share your opinion in a future issue, send your letter to editor@lannewspapers.com, and it will be considered for publication. Please invlude “Letter to the Editor” in the subject line. All submitted materials, including Letters to the Editor, will be subject to editing for space, libel, and obscenity.