by Garth MeyerIt began six years after the Korean War. It was pre-Moon Landing, pre-Los Angeles Lakers, though not before The Bullpen: the effort to put a boat launch in King Harbor. It concluded, or took an unprecedented step to do so, Nov. 4 when the Redondo Beach city council approved a site and directed staff to draw up a grant application, predetermined to fund the project.The unanimous vote puts the ramp between R10 Social House and Riviera Mexican Cantina, at a 45-degree
The fiscal cliff arrives: MBUSD sends out 58 pink slips
Mark McDermott
March 19, 2026
Just a question, if the City owns all the moles (whatever a mole is) then why are non-public, private, discriminating clubs allowed long term leases? Maybe Garth can run that down sometime for Redondo Beach taxpayers!
Clubs have been allowed since the harbor was opened. There are two yacht clubs and the Bay Club – that require memberships. The slips in the marinas are all private and access is limited to slip renters and their guests. The Paddle House has an area where they store SUP’s for their SUP club members as a paid service. Only outrigger canoe club members can use the outrigger canoe facility at Mole B. The City requires that the CA Surf Club include day passes for the general public. And half o the development is a fully public restaurant.
The Harbor Enterprise is unique in Redondo as the Enterprise is nearly entirely funded by the funds generated within the enterprise. It is an exception when funds from the General Fund are used in the Harbor Enterprise. In fact, sales tax and TOT generated in the Harbor Enterprise are a big funding source for the General Fund. The Harbor/Pier area is currently the largest revenue generator for the city’s General Fund.
Redondo resident taxpayers demand, “NO grant, NO ramp!” We want this condition written into the legislation. The estimated time of construction for the boat ramp won’t happen for at least five years according to the Redondo City Manager. Redondo resident taxpayers don’t want to get stuck with the bill when the grant that this entire project is relying on disappears.
Redondo resident taxpayers have been burned before by the City Council telling us that grant money would pay for the park under the powerlines. The grant money disappeared and Redondo resident taxpayers got stuck with a one million dollar bill for what is essentially landscaping.
Redondo resident taxpayers demand, “NO grant, NO ramp” so we don’t get burned for millions for a boat ramp that the vast majority of us will never use.
Department of Boating and Waterways has been part of the design process to ensure their inputs were included from the very start. Their grant process is a lengthy one, but we were not planning to start construction until after the Olympics anyway. We will go for Coastal Commission approvals in parallel.
Back in 2017, boaters mocked CenterCal’s $400 million waterfront plan for offering “one lousy single-lane launch ramp.” Fast-forward to 2025, and Redondo Beach is celebrating a two-lane ramp squeezed between restaurants, beside Seaside Lagoon, and facing open ocean surge. If rejecting a funded ramp led to spending millions pursuing an unfunded one, what exactly did we win?
The private investment the City walked away from has been replaced with an uncertain state grant — no guarantee, no environmental clearance, and no identified backup funding. A true public amenity expands safety, access, and usability. This proposal diminishes all three. If safe operation depends on ideal conditions and perfect timing, it isn’t safety. Boaters deserve functional access, but the broader public deserves functional coexistence.
The impacts reach beyond the launch lane. Families at the Lagoon inherit diesel exhaust, trailer stacking, and backup-alarm noise. Residents, liveaboards, and hotel guests trade coastal mornings for headlights, traffic queues, and pre-dawn launch commotion. Redondo depends on tourism and transient occupancy tax — but no one books a “Harbor View” room to overlook idling trucks and trailer lines. A working waterfront shouldn’t force the public to work around it.
Other coastal harbors report the same outcomes: launch queues blocking circulation, conflicts with swimmers and paddlecraft, overflow parking, surge-related safety incidents, street backups, and ongoing public subsidies for maintenance that outweigh direct revenue. This isn’t anti-boating. It’s pro-planning. Placing a high-intensity industrial use at the heart of a recreation-dependent waterfront isn’t a vision. It’s a collision course.
The boat ramp from the CenterCal plan was to have been paid for by a grant as well. CenterCal was not funding it. The City did not have the funds. The ramp location selected does not face open ocean surge. The configuration chosen took into consideration traffic flow on land and on water. It is supported by the Harbor Patrol. Swimming is illegal in the harbor and there are certainly no swimmers in the Basin 3 fairway.