Protect Commission from itself
Dear ER:
It often goes unrecognized, but it’s thanks to the California Coastal Commission that some of my favorite places in LA, such as Abalone Cove and Palos Verdes Cove are accessible for all Californians to enjoy. The recent move to oust Coastal Commission Executive Director Dr. Charles Lester is concerning because it doesn’t seem to be founded on any concrete performance issues. It is beginning to appear that the real motivations behind the ousting of Dr. Lester is political. Under Dr. Lester’s leadership, the Commission has approved projects that protect coastal access and sensitive habitats while respecting the rights of property owners.
The Commission’s ability to its goal of “protecting and enhancing California’s coast and ocean for present and future generations” is predicated on staff being empowered to act independently of outside pressures, political or otherwise. I urge the Coastal Commission to take strong action at its February meeting recognizing the leadership of Dr. Lester and his ability to bring both sides of the aisle together, rather than putting the effectiveness of the Coastal Commission in jeopardy.
Jose Bacallao
Hermosa Beach
History isn’t free
Dear ER:
I hate it when I have to take the Republican or Libertarian side of anything, but this “historical property” nonsense in Manhattan Beach is just nonsense (“Manhattan Beach historic preservation,” ERJan. 6, 2016) Leaving aside whatever constitutes “historical,” the matter is a question of 1. property rights, 2. tax advantages and 3. grant monies.In other words: 1. property rights, 2. welfare for the rich and 3. more welfare for the rich. Welfare should never be endowed to anyone above a lower-middle class level, regardless of lawyered semantic chicanery, but property is different and applies to all.
Intrusion upon it should extend no further than rectifying any matter that will harm the community. Beyond that, only a property owner should decide whether he or she wishes to preserve something as evanescent as having “historical value” — at an appreciable tax abatement (welfare), we note, but, still, an arrangement not without its merits- – and the city should have zero voice in that except to facilitate. The city however, presently can force historicity on property and thus enlarge its incoming state/federal grants (welfare) while only perhaps advantaging the property owner (in these cases, a homeowner), depending upon the homeowner’s intent. As for”historical districts” — are ya kiddin’ me? I’d love to see the secreted, bogus, for-the-few benefits that were shoved into that.
If a city, state, or federal entity wants to emplace a historical value on a property, let it avoid all legal/social problems and buy that thing. But it won’t do that, as that involves expense, not profit. This is not-so-subtle coercion and defeats the concept of property. How far, I ask, once that’s breached, does anyone care to take this?
Mark S. Tucker
Manhattan Beach
Apologize later
Dear ER:
Who authorized Redondo’s waterfront environmental impact report consultant CDM Smith to exceed budget by $600K without the Council’s approval? The additional budget and the CenterCal contract extension should have been brought to the Council before CDM Smith was authorized to incur the additional costs. Essentially, whoever approved the additional work tied the Council’s hands. And of course CenterCal made the reimbursement contingent on signing their extension.
Collusion, malfeasance or incompetence? None are good answers.
Jim Light
Redondo Beach
Bike on through, to Hermosa
Dear ER:
My husband and I lived in Redondo Beach for two years and still spend much of our recreational time there. Over the years, I’ve taken many friends and family members to the Redondo Pier to Tony’s, Kincaid’s, Captain Kidd’s, and now our new found gem: King Harbor Brewing Company. However, we find ourselves now quickly stopping for a beer, then riding our bikes into Hermosa. The run down parking structure is cold and dark, many of the restaurants on the pier are either closed or fast food looking, and the boardwalk is dirty and not appealing.
I am an aquatic physical therapist working out of the Westchester area and my husband is a functional exercise trainer at a high end gym in Santa Monica. We both work in the health and fitness realm and would someday love to start our business in the Redondo Beach area. However we are hesitant to invest in this due to the pier area not attracting the right clientele. Upon watching The Waterfront Project video, I now see that the Redondo Pier area was once a mecca for fitness, recreation, and entertainment. It had one of the only salt water plunge pools in the country, a performing arts theater, surfing events, and many authentic restaurants. As I walk through the pier I cannot envision anyone visiting the pier, other than to waste money at the old arcade, drink alcohol, or eat fast food and fried food. The beaches surrounding the pier are also unattractive looking due to the dark and grotesque looking buildings rising out of the water. This is truly a sad site to see knowing that the landscape and beachfront could be so much more attractive, inviting, and ideal for a healthy beach community. I for one, am a strong supporter of the Redondo Waterfront Project.
Alice Murphy
Lomita
Falling down, falling down
Dear ER:
So Redondo Beach City Treasurer and former City Councilman Steven Diels wishes to revisit the canard that the Redondo Pier parking garage suffers from “falling concrete,” (Sandbox, ER Feb. 4, 2016) I guess the city must be up to their ears in lawsuits because of all the property damage and injuries being caused. I guess that garage should have been shut down a long time ago. Yeah, right.
Brian Hittelman
Redondo Beach
Time to move on
Dear ER:
Opponents continue to ask that we think about waterfront revitalization before moving hastily forward. I understand why they may feel this way, as some of them just recently moved into Redondo Beach, so they did not have the opportunity to vote on Measure G, which was approved by voters in 2010. Measure G set the limits for development at the waterfront.
Opponents are correct that a once in a lifetime project such as this require careful planning, but at some point we have to progress from only thinking and actually doing. Redondo has been thinking for 30 years. It took until just a few years ago to finally start doing. The City entered an agreement with CenterCal four years ago, already. The environmental review process has been happening for over a year.
Every process that this project has gone through has been democratic and open to the entire community. It is not the time to scrap it all, now that we are almost done with it and the results have shown that it will be successful. If we do, we would be stuck with a crumbling infrastructure requiring immediate repairs, and without any short-term or long-term plan or funds.
Elisabeth Diels
Redondo Beach
Thumb on the scales
Dear ER:
I was disappointed this week to read an opinion piece penned by our City Treasurer Steven Diehls. Diehls infers that those who disagree with him are childish stating, “Well we can’t all have it our way. Such is the by-product of adulthood.” I would submit to Diehls we can disagree and yet not be disagreeable. To suggest that an opinion different than yours can only be viewed as childish serves only to divide and quite frankly personifies the type of tantrum he vilifies with his statement.
Those who disagree with you are neither childish nor of an inferior intellect. They simply have a differing view. Until we can all get over these types of demeaning attacks open effective dialog will never be obtained.
More disturbing, is boasting you are the City of Redondo Beach Treasurer. I would ask you to keep your thumb off the scales of public opinion and not use your office as a pulpit.
Eugene J Solomon
Redondo Beach
Landlord neglect
Dear ER:
It’s a no brainer for the owner of a four-unit apartment building to spend money maintaining it.
Redondo Beach has failed in its fiduciary responsibility by not maintaining the 1,000 vehicle Pier Parking Structure. Redondo needs to follow the 2012 Walker Restoration Consultant’s report for maintaining the North and South Pier parking structures for another 15 years. How stupid is it for the city not to spend money maintaining an asset that provides a yearly revenue stream of $2,500,000.
Greg Diete
Campaign reform clears air
Dear ER:
The Redondo city council two weeks ago voted to extend a contract with CenterCal, nearly seven months before the contract would expired. The vote came down to a tie. Councilmembers Steve Sammarco and Bill Brand, who did not take money from the Redondo Beach Chamber or Centercal, wanted to hold off on the extension. Laura Emdee and Christian Horvath, who ran their council campaigns on donations from the Chamber/Centercal, voted to extend the contract with Centercal.
Who broke the tie? Mayor Aspel, the only Redondo Beach elected official to appear in the waterfront promo video paid for by Centercal. As resident Martin Holmes was quoted, “It looks like Redondo has a For Sale sign.” I’ll give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but it does seem that there is a rift on the council. Elected officials who have benefited from Centercal, and those who have not. Redondo Beach is the only South Bay City that does not have campaign finance reform city-wide. We need election campaign finance reform right now.
Nils Nehrenheim
