The NoPowerPlant movement on Wednesday morning submitted petitions with over 9,000 signatures, which if found valid are more than enough to qualify as a ballot initiative that would propose removing power generation as an acceptable use on the Redondo Beach waterfront and potentially prevent the AES power plant from continuing to operate.
Jim Light, the president of activist group Building a Better Redondo and a chief organizer of the NoPowerPlant.com political action committee, said the signatures could take up to a month to be certified by the Los Angeles County registrar’s office. But he cautiously expressed optimism and said he hopes the initiative will appear on the March municipal election ballot.
“I never claim victory ‘til it comes back from the county…but this is definitely a big day,” Light said. “I was very pleased with how quickly we gathered those signatures. I think it started August 9 and obviously finished [Sept. 11]. People in general were against the power plant and were very supportive of getting rid of it.”
The initiative campaign has come under fire, however, from Councilmen Steve Diels and Steve Aspel over the use of Congressman Henry Waxman’s statement on NoPowerPlant.com mailers. Councilman Bill Brand, another key organizer of NoPowerPlant.com, solicited Waxman for a statement opposing the power plant.
Waxman supplied a statement encouraging the removal of the power plant but did not support the initiative itself as a means of doing so.
“As the author of the 1990 Clean Air Act, I think it is absolutely essential that we do all we can to cut air pollution in the region,” Waxman said in the statement. “There is no question that burning fossil fuels causes significant pollution and health impacts. We need to be shifting to clean energy. I believe we should remove the power plant from Redondo Beach. I encourage AES and California’s regulatory agencies to take this opportunity to permanently retire this facility and allow redevelopment of the site.”
Diels wrote Waxman a letter expressing concern for what he called the Congressman’s “apparent endorsement” of the initiative. Waxman replied with a letter that said that he initially did not want to get involved in the decision-making process surrounding the power plant, since it is not a federal matter, but issued the statement in order to side with the residents and other elected officials who would like to see the AES plant retired, if possible.
“In submitting my statement, I explicitly told Council member Brand that I was not endorsing the ballot proposal,” Waxman wrote to Diels. “I think it is unwise and will lead to a great deal of litigation, even though I am sympathetic to their goals.”
Waxman also wrote that he respects the view of Mayor Mike Gin “who has indicated that he thinks the city and everyone else needs a lot more information before a decision is made about the power plant.”
Diels said the use of Waxman’s statement on the flyer implied he endorsed the initiative thus misled voters.
“Bill Brand is perpetuating a fraud on the people of Redondo Beach,” Diels said.
Brand defended the use of Waxman’s statement on the flyer.
“I never said he was endorsing the initiative,” Brand said. “…I stand by using the quote Congressman Waxman sent us to use. I met with Congressman Waxman and explained a very complicated issue to him. He said he was staying out of local land use battles, but he was opposed to a new power plant there, and that was his statement.”
Aspel believes the matter should be investigated by the Fair Political Practices Commission. He said that Waxman’s response showed that he is in agreement with the City Council majority and the mayor in wanting to get rid of the plant but through a collaborative process that does not risk litigation.
“They are calling AES a slick marketing machine that is not honest, and yet they are putting out their own misinformation. This is proof positive they are pulling things right out of their rear end. Waxman is aligned with exactly everything we are working on. The fact that they are using his as a centerpiece of their mailer is disingenuous at best and fraud at worst….This is not just disingenuous, this is an outright lie. The FPPC will be notified.”
Waxman, in an email this week, said he was aware his statement opposing the plant had been used on a flyer.
“I was not surprised that my quote was used by those who are trying to accomplish the same goal through the ballot proposal,” Waxman wrote. “I have not supported the ballot proposal, but despite my misgivings, I will not oppose it either.”
Light said Diels should not “loosely throw around the word fraud” as it carries strong legal connotations. He said the use of Waxman’s statement was in no way misleading in that his quote plainly states the Congressman’s position opposing a power plant.
“We specifically put it in that way very clearly…We are not going to put words in people’s mouths,” Light said, adding that Diels’ letter to Waxman is misleading because he has not officially opposed the power plant in any way. “It just shows where his bias is – he’d rather attack residents than work with us to help oppose this power plant.”
