SANTA MONICA, CA — Wade Kelly was born in Culver City in 1959 and grew up in Southern California and the San Francisco Bay Area, where he sang with the San Francisco Boys Chorus and studied music at UC Berkeley during the summers.
His education also took him to Birmingham, Alabama, where he attended the Alabama School of Fine Arts, before a career in entertainment carried him across the country. He worked in theater and nightclubs, eventually returning to Southern California and studying improvisational comedy at the Second City training center at Santa Monica's Mayfair Theatre in 1989.
For approximately a decade, Kelly has performed music on Third Street Promenade, where his performances gradually evolved into peaceful protests against the treatment of people experiencing homelessness. Initially concentrating on songs about peace and love, he became increasingly involved in advocacy after witnessing conditions on the streets.
Kelly, 67, says he became homeless in 2021, having previously stayed with friends while traveling to Santa Monica to perform. He has lived in his car and says those experiences have shaped his political priorities.
A member of Santa Monica's Measure GS Resident Oversight Committee, Kelly previously ran for City Council in 2024. He is seeking office again this November, campaigning on affordable housing, economic equality and the rights of homeless residents, while advocating for more housing on publicly owned land, including part of the Santa Monica Airport property.
What is Santa Monica getting wrong about homelessness today, and what would you do differently?
First of all, we need to stand up for human rights. That's why I'm running for Santa Monica City Council. There are no shelter beds available to me tonight in Santa Monica, and yet I could be arrested for sleeping outdoors while being poor. That's cruel and inhumane.
We're not going to end this housing crisis or homelessness crisis by arresting people. It just makes life more miserable for human beings. Since the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson, cities have been cracking down on people sleeping outdoors and dismantling encampments, even when there's nowhere else for them to go.
We're using the Santa Monica Police Department like ICE to push poor people out of Santa Monica, into Los Angeles, Venice and other communities, then pointing to declining local homelessness numbers.
Meanwhile, we're closing local shelter beds and looking at leasing beds in Bell. We're heading in the wrong direction. We need affordable housing, safe places to sleep and a government that helps lift people out of poverty instead of criminalizing them.
What measurable result would convince you that a city-funded homelessness program is working, and what result would cause you to stop funding it?
We need to establish how many homeless human beings are actually in Santa Monica, how many we're going to house and how many shelter beds or safe sleeping spaces we need.
The recent count identified 718 people, but I believe that's an undercount. I've participated in a count before, and I question how it was conducted. Look at the SAMO Bridge program. According to figures I've seen, 462 people went through the program, but only 54 had their citations removed. That's a terrible result.
I asked how many of those people received permanent housing in Santa Monica, and nobody could tell me. If a program isn't helping people find housing and improve their circumstances, why are we spending money on it? We should measure whether we're actually lifting people out of homelessness.
What should happen when someone living on the street repeatedly refuses an offer of shelter, treatment or services?
I don't believe people are necessarily being offered safe, secure shelter in the first place. I've tried to find shelter myself. There aren't enough beds for the number of people experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica.
We should provide safe places to sleep, including small villages of prefabricated housing, like approaches being used in Culver City and Seattle. If we actually had enough housing and shelter, then we could start discussing what happens when somebody refuses it. But we don't have that situation now.
What's your default karaoke song?
I don't do much karaoke. I play guitar and sing on the Promenade, including songs about homelessness and politics, as well as love songs.
What song or band makes you crank up the volume in the car?
The Beatles.
Santa Monica Airport is scheduled to close at the end of 2028. What, specifically, do you believe should replace it?
I would propose using some of those 192 acres for affordable housing. It's amazing that we don't try harder to provide homes for people who work in Santa Monica, including first responders. Many commute long distances because they can't afford to live here.
That's also an environmental issue. If people drive an hour or more to work, we're creating unnecessary pollution. Santa Monica had approximately 88,000 residents in 1970 and has grown only modestly since then, while California's population has increased dramatically.
We need to make room for more people, particularly working-class people. There's nothing wrong with creating a great park on part of the airport property, but refusing even to consider affordable housing is inhumane and greedy.
The airport site is roughly 192 acres and converting it will be enormously expensive. How much should Santa Monica taxpayers be expected to pay for the project, and where should the rest of the money come from?
We need to raise taxes on the wealthy, whether that's locally, statewide or nationally. California has enormous wealth, but we also have enormous homelessness. Obviously, we need to reconfigure our business model.
I support Proposition 40 and believe we eventually need to repeal Proposition 13. We should be willing to tax wealthy people to provide essential services and housing for working people.
If billionaires want to leave California because we ask them to pay more, let them go. We're one of the wealthiest economies in the world. We should be able to make sure everybody has the basics they need.
What's your guilty-pleasure TV show?
I recently watched "Euphoria," which was a little trashy. I don't know if I'd call it a guilty pleasure. It would probably have to be some kind of comedy.
When was the last time you took public transport and where was it to?
The last time was when my car wasn't running, and I took public transportation to the Promenade. I've used public transportation quite a lot over the years, including traveling from West Hollywood to Santa Monica and taking the train downtown for a gun-law rally.
What is the single most important thing City Hall can do in the next two years to bring businesses and residents back to Third Street Promenade?
Property owners could lower their rents and divide larger spaces into smaller businesses that serve working people. We also need to make sure the Promenade remains accessible to everybody. It's public space, not something that belongs exclusively to wealthy businesses and hotel owners.
They've removed permanent seating and locked up chairs at night because they don't want poor people sitting there, particularly at night. They're making it harder for people to enjoy their own public spaces.
I'd like to see a large community center on the Promenade where everybody could gather, find services and get information. We have plenty of empty buildings that could be used for something other than high-end retail.
Is downtown Santa Monica fundamentally suffering from a public-safety problem, a business-model problem or a development problem, and what role should new housing play in its recovery?
It's a business-model problem. Look at the property on Fourth Street where a 122-unit affordable housing development is planned. That project faced opposition and delays, and the site was temporarily used for pickleball.
Apparently, homeless people don't need a front door; they need pickleball. I'm glad that's closed now and the housing project can move forward.
We need to stop treating downtown as somewhere primarily for wealthy businesses and start thinking about the people who live and work here. Affordable housing should be part of downtown's future.
Who would you most hate to be stuck in a lift with?
Donald Trump, although I'd enjoy telling him what I think. I'd also say Gavin Newsom because I believe he's done a terrible job standing up for poor and homeless people. But I suppose I'd most hate to be stuck in a lift with a dead person.
What's your most irrational superstition or habit?
Sometimes I talk over people and don't listen enough.
Does Santa Monica have a revenue problem or a spending problem and if finances deteriorate, what specifically would you be prepared to cut or change?
Santa Monica has a spending problem. We would rather pay people to clean up urine and feces than provide secure, 24-hour public restrooms. We're spending money on programs like SAMO Bridge that I don't believe are helping people out of poverty.
We could also save tens of millions of dollars by cutting senior staff salaries. Some of those positions are extremely well paid. We need to spend money more effectively, concentrating on services that help people instead of programs that punish poverty and homelessness.
Who was your childhood hero?
Elvis Presley. Franklin Delano Roosevelt also comes to mind, although that may have been later.
What's the most recent book you gave up on, and why?
"The Sound and the Fury" William Faulkner might have been the last one I didn't finish. I think I managed to get through "Ulysses."
Has Santa Monica gone too far, not far enough or roughly the right distance in redesigning streets around bicycles and pedestrians and would you support removing or substantially redesigning a project that was shown to create new safety or access problems?
Government needs to be willing to make adjustments as it learns what works for the community. If bicycle lanes are creating access problems, or bus lanes are causing traffic difficulties, we should look at making changes.
I'd love everybody to be able to travel without creating pollution or sitting in traffic, but we have to find a balance. We shouldn't design everything around people who can afford parking in luxury apartments while making life more difficult for everybody else.
What's the worst job you've ever had?
Shoveling snow for 12 hours in Minnesota. I only did it for one day and didn't go back. Another difficult one was playing a Jem'Hadar on "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine." We were filming in a rock quarry near Sylmar in 117-degree heat, and I was wearing a full mask and neoprene costume. People on the crew were passing out.
What completely different job would you secretly love to do?
I'd like to fly an airplane. I once took the controls of a friend's plane, although I didn't land it.
Santa Monica faces major decisions over the future of both the Civic Auditorium and Bergamot Station. What should happen to each, and how much should preserving their existing cultural uses influence those decisions?
I've seen estimates of around $360 million to make the Civic Auditorium usable again. At that kind of cost, I think it should probably be demolished.
I'd like to see some of the Civic Center parking lot used for temporary housing, perhaps prefabricated units. It's close to the police station, and there's enough space to do something useful. Eventually, I'd hope we could build affordable housing on some of that property.
At Bergamot Station, we should be able to accommodate affordable housing while continuing to provide space for artists. We don't have to choose between those uses. We should be looking for ways to make public land serve more people.
Do you have any tattoos?
No. I have some scars, but no tattoos.
Should Santa Monica continue challenging state housing mandates, or accept that Sacramento has largely removed the city's discretion and concentrate on deciding where new housing goes?
Santa Monica needs to build affordable housing. The city initially submitted a housing plan that the state rejected, and the resulting disputes over development led to the builder's remedy situation.
We spent too much time fighting housing instead of building it. I also object to allowing developers to provide affordable units at separate locations rather than integrating them into their projects. That contributes to segregation.
We need to make it possible for working-class people and people of color to live throughout Santa Monica, rather than continuing to push them out.
Does Santa Monica need substantially more housing, and if so, where should it be built? Would you concentrate most new development downtown even if that means substantially taller buildings, and what areas should be protected from additional density?
Yes, Santa Monica needs substantially more housing, especially affordable housing, and it should be built throughout the city.
We should make better use of land the city already owns. The affordable housing project on Fourth Street is expected to cost more than $1 million per unit. We need to find ways to build housing more affordably, without fighting every project in every neighborhood.
I supported the Great Park and Community Housing Initiative, which proposed using 25 percent of the airport property for approximately 3,000 homes over 10 years. That's a good start, but we should also look at opportunities across Santa Monica, not concentrate everything in one neighborhood.
We need to work toward equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity, and that includes making it possible for people with lower incomes to live here. I want a government that helps lift people out of poverty instead of criminalizing poverty and homelessness. That's why I'm running for City Council.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Related:
Sign up for free local newsletters and alerts for the
Santa Monica Patch
Patch.com is the nationwide leader in hyperlocal news.
Visit Patch.com to find your town today.