Scrolling Instagram today I got an ad for a new co-working space in our district called Second Home LA.

They call themselves "A Healthy Workspace" because of the greenery, fresh air, and amenities they provide for members.

Seems nice, but there's a lot to unpack here...

Second Home is a London-based company who took over this real estate in 2015 from a community center called the Assistance League which had been there for decades. In fairness, the AL was relocating and had always been a pretty traditional non-profit. https://www.paulrwilliamsproject.org/gallery/anne-banning-community-house-los-angeles-ca/

In 2016 Second Home applied for a bunch of code deviations to be able to operate 24 hrs, sell alcohol, and get around parking requirements. Save Hollywood and others tried to appeal this and stop the project but were overruled.

https://planning.lacity.org/StaffRpt/InitialRpts/ZA-2016-1530%20COMMPACK.pdf

While I wish the appeal had stopped this monstrous capitalistic playground, my concerns with the space are not about alcohol or parking.

It's not even about the insensitivity of calling a workspace in Hollywood, where at least 2000 people do not have homes, "Second Home"

No, what kills me about this place is that we now have a lush, air-purifying green space in our tree-starved district that most people here cannot afford to access.

(the stupid yellow dots are Second Home, this image pulled from their own IG which boasts of being a green oasis)

To go deeper on this, take a sec to read through this in-depth thread from the brilliant @nithyavraman on the inequality of green space and tree canopy in Los Angeles.

As our planet heats up and our city sees more and more heat waves, trees save lives. https://twitter.com/nithyavraman/status/1304144441905537024?s=20

You can see that the area where Second Home is located is a heat island with less tree coverage than the LA average.

Right around the corner, Hancock Park has 10.51% MORE tree coverage than the average.

In LA, tree access = wealth

via @TreePeople_org
https://www.treepeople.org/treeviewer 

So who has access to this new green space in Hollywood?
The cheapest way in is a day pass which is $25.
A private studio starts at $675 per person/month.
A membership with access to shared work areas is $250 a month for one person. Or there are paid events avail for non-members

Anyone who, like me, has done organizing + outreach around housing justice knows that--especially in hot months--one of the #1 things we are asked to help people access is shade. Usually in the form of a tent or tarp.

That's it, just shade.
But our city is even privatizing that

Now, there's nothing wrong with private businesses having trees, yay trees!

But to create what is essentially a park and then put it behind gilded gates with no way for the average person to access anything even remotely similar to it feels cruel in times like these.

One of the main things City Council oversees is how land is used. It's not always as simple as deciding "this is a park! that's an office!" and since the land seems to have been privately owned the city would've had to buy back the lot to turn it into a public park.

But there are creative steps Council can take to make sure that when such fancy and privatized projects happen (barf) that there's a required, publicly-accessible facet as well. That could mean creating a certain amount of external green space or allowing the public in for free.

I also suspect we're going to see an uptick in private green spaces as wealthy Angelenos push back against the presence of encampments in public parks.

They need to know this:
The answer is not fewer public parks, it's more public housing.

Regardless, when I see businesses like this pop up in our district it functions as a perfect, symbolic microcosm of our current leaders' priorities: A green playground for the wealthy, while our unhoused neighbors sleep in the heat and sun just outside the gates

It also reminds me why I'm running.

We need leaders on our council who see projects like this for what they are: The encroachment of private interests on public rights

We need leaders who will fight for what we need:
To value and protect basic human dignity for all