Be gone!
Dear ER:
There’s something seriously wrong when an $18 billion corporation spends over $400,000 to flood our city with propaganda, TV ads, robo calls, etc. AES hijacked the citizen’s initiative process, convincing a short-term Redondo Beach resident to submit this initiative, now known as Measure B, on their behalf. It’s a blatant corruption of a process enacted for citizens without deep pockets to petition their local government.
There’s something seriously wrong when our mayor, on record that he doesn’t and wouldn’t support any citizen’s initiative, becomes head cheerleader for this one – an AES-windfall profit plan. There’s something seriously wrong when elected officials support Measure B without any independent fiscal analysis, public input, and if passed, will be exempt from CEQA or an EIR because it’s technically a citizen’s initiative.
Voting NO on Measure B paves the way for the collaboration with AES they’ve promised for years but haven’t provided. AES cannot build another industrial use. Their property is not zoned for industrial. AES cannot build a new power plant. They’ve not been granted a long-term contract from SCE, who stated last November that AES-Redondo won’t even be considered.
We all want compromise sooner rather than later. That can only be accomplished when we vote for government officials who do not repeatedly try to shove over-development down our throats. We lack progress because our City government goes against residents, who vote down over-development. Â So let’s change that, too. Vote NO on B and elect Candace Allen-Nafissi, City Council, District 3.
Lezlie Campeggi
Redondo Beach
Story of O
Dear ER:
There’s a tale of the young lady who was asked if she would spend the night with a gentleman for a million dollars. Â “Well, of course,” she replied. Then asked if she would do it for $20, she huffed, “What do you think I am?” Â The response: “We’ve already established that. Now we’re trying to determine the price.”
To those who have sipped the Kool-Aid and would sell their city for a promise of $17.5 million, please trade this pipe-dream of instant gratification for a safe Hermosa Beach and its children’s future.
Vote No on O.
Patricia S. Jones
Hermosa Beach
Â
O good
Dear ER:
I’ll be voting yes on Measure O in Hermosa Beach and I encourage all other voters to do the same.  I’ve sat through two years of fear mongering, lies and scare tactics from the anti-oil crowd, many of whom are not Hermosa Beach residents but feel it’s ok to encourage the financial downfall of Hermosa Beach in order to promote their own personal agendas.  They will neither profit from the benefits of Measure O if it passes or suffer the financial downfall if it doesn’t. The bottom line is that this oil drilling project is safe, clean and poses no health threats. The city-commissioned reports confirm these facts. Also confirmed in the Cost Benefit Analysis is that the City stands to earn a lot of revenue from this project. Opponents try to down-play the benefits by using low oil prices and tidelands restrictions as reasons not to move forward. Even so, the financial benefits to the city, our schools and household mineral rights owners are still many millions of dollars more than if we choose to vote no.  A vote of no means no revenue for the city, no money for schools, no monthly mineral rights checks for homeowners and we must take a $17.5 million hit to our budget to pay back the settlement loan. Our city is not in a position to turn down millions of dollars of free money when we’ve got a list of over $100 million worth of unfunded capital improvement projects waiting to happen. Please join me and other Hermosa Beach residents in voting YES on Measure O to protect Hermosa’s future.
Lorie Armendariz
Hermosa Beach
Â
Uh O
Dear ER:
To those who have yet to vote on Measure O, I ask you to consider the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It’s that simple.  If you would not vote for drilling next to your house, do not vote for it near someone else’s.  In our beautiful city, it doesn’t belong near anyone’s house.
Allan Mason
Hermosa Beach
O really?
Dear ER:
In last week’s article on Hermosa oil drilling, Michael Finch of E&B talked about the environmental damage caused by oil drilling in other countries, noting that California oil drilling is much cleaner and safer. He also talked about the environmental risks of shipping oil across the globe. These points highlight the importance of looking beyond the local risks and benefits.
But if we’re going to look at the big picture, we should also look at another global impact: climate change. The best science we have, from the U.N.’s International Panel on Climate Change, tells us that somewhere between 2/3 and 4/5 of fossil fuel reserves need to stay in the ground to avoid dangerous climate change. So the point is not whether to drill here or there, but whether to drill at all.
Also, Mr. Finch claimed the moral high ground in considering broader environmental considerations. For moral leadership on this issue, I offer the perspective of South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Prize winner and anti-apartheid leader. In a piece in The Guardian last April, Archbishop Tutu wrote that we all have the responsibility to stop climate change. He said, “People of conscience need to break their ties with corporations financing the injustice of climate change. We can encourage more of our…municipalities…to cut their ties to the fossil-fuel industry.  We can…hold those who rake in the profits accountable for cleaning up the mess.” No matter what the project might do for us in the short term, it’s a bad idea in the long term.
Ann Hempelmann
Hermosa Beach
Â
From Oh No to O Yes
Dear ER:
I have always been against oil drilling in Hermosa. Not entirely because of the “disaster” scenarios, which I think are over-hyped by people who don’t understand the new technology, but because I hate the thought of obnoxious smells, traffic and noise that would wreck my little beach town.
On the other hand, I hate the $17.5 million debt that will make Hermosa the financial runt of the South Bay, with yearly interest payments, unmet city infrastructure projects, constrained services (e.g., police, fire) and schools that are always out of money.
I did my homework, and my research tells me that the visual and auditory aspects will be bad for months, but not forever. Check out the rendering of what it would look like at the website protecthermosafuture.org. No tall structures, no rigs, a small footprint, acceptable decibel levels.
I admit that if I lived 100 feet from the drilling site, I might not want to “take one for the team” either. But if the price of oil stays low, won’t we look stupid paying E&B $17.5 million for not drilling when they themselves cancel because it’s no longer profitable?
My yes vote on Measure O won’t count, because my wife is voting no. She doesn’t trust anything about the E&B project or our city officials and their ability to insure that things go smoothly. What a mess.  Even if we don’t pass Measure 0, I will always love my little beach town, even if it’s broke.
Randy Rodman
Hermosa Beach
Â
O dear
Dear ER:
When I look at Measure O, I have some serious concerns. Yes, the environmental and safety concerns are real. Â The practical concerns about increased truck traffic, the eye-sore 110 foot oil rig, and the guaranteed inconveniences with the project being conducted in the middle of our city are all real. Â But I also see legal issues.
Measure O grants a vested right to proceed with its project. This means that all authorizations given to the oil company cannot be taken away without due process of law and “just compensation.” If approved, any effort to later withdraw, remove or repeal the authority granted by Measure O, would most likely cost the City of Hermosa Beach well in excess of the hundreds of millions of dollars Macpherson was seeking. This is a legal and financial risk that outweighs any benefit oil money could hypothetically have for our city.
Moreover, Measure O does not just allow oil drilling in Hermosa Beach, it also “awards a pipeline franchise to transport oil/gas underground in the City of Hermosa Beach.”  This would  be done by causing Valley Drive to be torn up to lay new pipelines. Any breach of the pipelines could cause adverse effects to that same street and any nearby residents. Such risks and/or other construction will cause both traffic problems and problems for our children to get to school every morning. Either way, this too should be a significant consideration when determining how to vote on March 3.
Additionally, the Measure calls for the public to determine that the speculative and non-guaranteed financial benefits outweigh its “unavoidable environmental impacts.” How can any citizen, who looks at this project objectively, agree that a speculative benefit outweighs an unavoidable consequence?
Finally, Measure O would change existing laws and does so for one oil company. This one company would then be operating in Hermosa Beach for the next 30 to 40 years. Ask yourself two questions: 1) Has E&B been absolutely honest and transparent in all of its comments regarding its project? and 2) Is E&B Oil the company you want the City to have to deal with for 40 years? If you doubt even a single statement from E&B, then you should vote No on O. This is a relationship that you cannot get out of once it is created.
We, the citizens and voters of Hermosa Beach, all need to understand exactly what we are all giving up if this measure passes. The ballot measure is nine (9) pages of legalese; if you don’t understand every line of the measure, then you should almost automatically vote no.
Corey Glave
Hermosa Beach
Â
No Parkland, No on B
Dear ER:
South Bay Parkland Conservancy is non-profit and founded in 2004 in response to the lack of open space that remains in the South Bay. Hundreds of concerned members realize the South bay is critically underserved with little open space for health and recreation. Specific to the area adjacent to the AES site, there are 13,000 people per square mile in Hermosa Beach and nearly 11,000 people per square mile in Redondo Beach. In very close proximity to the plant – to the east, west and south, medium density residential housing, senior housing, hotels, and retail establishments, and along northern border, high density residential housing Hermosa Beach.
Redondo Beach has just 2.45 acres of open space per thousand residents (LA county has well over 7 acres), well below the minimum threshold established by state. The open space value includes county beaches.
That is why it is so critical for Redondo Beach voters to understand to vote No on Measure B. There is no zoning for any public space required in the measure. Twice the residents of Redondo Beach have voted for part of this land to include a  park. RB mayor and City Council members have ignored these votes. Make your needs known. RB needs space for the future. No on B!
Melanie L. Cohen
Redondo Beach
