Blue Zone the beach
Dear ER:
As someone with a background in science and public policy, as well as the Founder and Chair of the South Bay Bicycle Coalition, I want to register my strongest possible support for the Beach Cities Health District’s drive to become a Vitality City. I first learned of the Blue Zones’ startling research at Manhattan Beach TEDx earlier this year. My eyes were opened to the facts that many diverse communities around the world shared simple common traits that led to longer, happier, and higher quality lives. I would encourage anyone to Google “Blue Zones Ted” and prepare to be dazzled.
I have followed BCHD’s interest in the Blue Zones Vitality City program with delight. The initial pilot program (in Albert Lea, Minnesota) had staggering results, such as major health care cost reductions, lower absenteeism, weight loss, and life expectancy increases. As an early adopter of the program, the Vitality City program in the South Bay would receive at least $3.5 million in outside funding to improve our community and become a national model.
The initiatives that the Vitality City team has examined would make our community more livable and healthier. These include establishing more bikeways, making our neighborhoods more walkable, and creating an environment where making the healthy choice is the easy choice. We are blessed every day we live here by the wise decisions of our forbearers to invest in creating gems like The Strand, our piers, greenbelts, and parks. Those visionaries did not rest on their laurels as they innovated and pushed the envelope to create the beautiful, active, and world renowned Beach Cities. Neither should we.
Creating a healthier community for all isn’t just a side project of the Beach Cities Health District and its $10 million annual budget; in fact, it is their sole charter. I applaud the BCHD continued quest to help us live better lives. Now is the time to seize this opportunity. Please join me in enthusiastically supporting the BCHD participation in the Vitality City program.
Todd Dipaola
Manhattan Beach
Healthy payoff
Dear ER:
I just read the great letter by Madonna Newburg about how BCHD is spending $1.8 million of our tax money on “Vitality City.” (“Health openness,” Letters to the editor, ER Sept. 16, 2010). That’s only the tip of the iceberg. The BCHD is really the South Bay Hospital District, and it reformed when we no longer needed it, since Torrance Memorial and Little Company met all our needs. SBHD had $80 million of assets from our taxes at the time that it converted to BCHD and now it’s spending them willy-nilly. BCHD gets $5 million per year in property taxes and user fees from local residents. Newburg has a great point and BCHD needs to either be disbanded and have its funds repatriated to the cities, or, it needs to be put under tight city control.
Jane Persinger
Redondo Beach
Healthy facts
Dear ER
I was dismayed to read Madonna Newburg’s letter regarding the Beach Cities Health District quest to become the next Vitality City (“Health openness,” Letters to the editor, ER Sept. 16, 2010). As a Redondo Beach resident and a member of the BCHD Strategic Planning Committee, I believe this program is exactly what the BCHD should be pursuing. Communities and individuals must become more focused on promoting healthy lifestyles to combat the tidal wave of obesity, diabetes, rising medical costs and aging population. We simply cannot afford not to support this healthy lifestyle initiative.
The Vitality City project in Albert Lea, Minnesota, had impressive results and that city is continuing to build upon the initial efforts. What a great program for BCHD to build upon. Team members from the Albert Lea project have visited the Beach Cities multiple times, and they’ve always expressed a genuine interest in making our community a healthier place.
Unfortunately, Newburg’s letter wasn’t completely accurate, and I wanted to clear it up for residents: There have been several public meetings in addition to the Manhattan Beach Joslyn Center meeting. The next will be the BCHD Board of Directors meeting on Sept. 29. Newburg also implied that the BCHD doesn’t have a balanced budget, though it exceeded budget expectations last year and is operating under a balanced budget this year. All of this information is available to the public, including meeting dates, and can be found at www.bchd.org.
Lenore Bloss
Redondo Beach
Planner’s foresight
Dear ER:
With regards to the Appeal Court’s ruling that Hermosa Beach cannot impose a blanket ban on tattoo parlors, I would like to point out that at the initial Planning Commission hearing on this issue the lone vote against such a ban was Commissioner Sam Perrotti.
Commissioner Perrotti had the foresight to know such a ban could not withstand judicial review. Kudos to Perrotti for his long history of well thought out, even-handed decisions.
A. Doherty
Hermosa Beach
Bell ringers
Dear ER:
The tattoo parlor controversy is a continuation of a racket. Hermosa’s former city attorneys Ed Lee and Charles Vose have moved on to more profitable venues, making headlines at the City of Bell. But their successor Mike Jenkins is taking up where they left off. Spouting the gibberish from the ultra conservative prohibitionist and transplanted New Yorker, councilman Michael DiVirgilio along with his companion councilman wingnut Pete Tucker, Jenkins has learned the value of churning legal fees.
All except the most anal in Hermosa could care less about a tattoo shop. This is another non-issue, a repugnant redistribution of wealth from hard working citizens and business owners to lawyers and city council members who have no conscience and have no honest way of making a buck.
I too, congratulate Johnny Anderson. However, his victory is hollow unless he blesses Hermosa with his business. Obviously, anyone would understand if he passes, as fighting City Hall is a no win proposition.
Bob Benz
Hermosa Beach
Income distribution
Dear ER:
Now that almost everyone except Hermosa Beach taxpayers have an infusion of cash (“Hermosa Beach Settles with wrongly fired officer”, ER Sept. 16, 2010), hopefully Hermosa Beach Police Officer Todd Lewitt will contribute to our tax base by spending some of his new found wealth by getting himself some more tattoos at Johnny Anderson’s soon to open Tattoo Parlor in downtown Hermosa Beach. The madness in this city simply continues.
Nofreakinway
Web site comment
Broken play
Dear ER:
Both the Easy Reader grammar department and columnist Bob Pinzler are in need of some help.
First, on page 15 of the Sept. 16 issue, the headline reads “Mira Costa hosts Serra in marquis matchup.” Only one problem: a “marquis” is an English nobleman ranking above a duke and below an earl. A “marquee” matchup, however, is one fitting headline billing, a special performance or event.
Second, according to Pinzler, “The average age of a sewer pipe in the City of Los Angeles is over 50 years. It’s about the same in Redondo Beach. Yet neither city has a program for a complete upgrade of the system to prevent spills and failures. In fact, their ‘program’ is to respond to spills and failures, when the cost is highest.”
Has our former councilman forgotten Redondo’s Sewer Fee enacted — only after acrimonious resistance from activists — under the Lou Garcia regime? You know, the fee enacted to pay for a sewer repair bond after 83 percent of all the city’s sewer lines had either been recently replaced or were in the process of being upgraded from money already in the city budget? The fee that was set at $5 per month for a single family home and would never have to be raised, but which has been raised twice and is now 2-1/2 times that much, with no end in sight? Or maybe Pinzler is talking about the sewer bond that was originally bought to the council to repay the city for things such as parking meters, bicycle racks, storm drains, etc., not a one of which concerned the sewer system? Yeah, Pinzler must be talking about that sewer maintenance rip-off, err…program.
Jess Money
Redondo Beach, CA
Editor’s note: The Mira Costa headline was a broken play on the name of Serra wide receiver Marqise Lee. Unfortunately, we spelled his name wrong.
Cold food info
Dear ER
In reading Richard Foss’ column (“A la carte,” ER Sept. 16, 2010), I felt like he needed some updating on the information. He writes, “What the Heck is Happening in Redondo?” and then went on about “so many openings in Riviera Village”. Of the places named, Asaka has been open since May. Sophie’s Place and Tapas & Vino have been open since mid-August. If you take a look online at yelp.com, there are more than a half-dozen reviews up already for each establishment.
Additionally, it might not be a big help to many folks to read about the Fleming wine nights in September when the month is half-over.
Your colloquial, simple to read folksy-ness undoubtedly has many readers at least glancing through his column, a plus in our illiterate age, so keep at it. However, please his (hopefully) insider abilities to bring us more about what is coming, rather than what has already come.
Attorney logic
Dear ER:
Redondo Beach City Attorney Mike Webb acknowledges that the city has the legal authority to phase out the operation of the power plant in King Harbor. But he cautions that such action might result in very expensive litigation against the city by the plant’s owner, AES.
However, Webb expressed no concern for the cost of litigation when he advised the City Council a year ago that it could bypass the provisions of the City Charter, and the will of the people, by skipping the required public vote on proposed new zoning ordinances in the harbor area. As a result, local citizens had to sue the city to secure their right to vote on the zoning. The citizens won, but along the way, Webb hired two very expensive outside law firms to defend the city’s illegal attempt to deprive the voters of their rights.
Thanks to the citizen lawsuit, Redondo Beach will vote this November on Measure G, the new zoning proposed by the Council. This proposal allows an additional 400,000 square feet of development west of Harbor Drive in King Harbor and time-shares up to three stories high. This is plainly excessive, and the city’s own traffic studies confirm that any such development will result in over 30,000 new car trips per day and highway gridlock in the area. Do we want that for our waterfront and surrounding neighborhoods?
Vote NO on Measure G and insist that the city come forward with sensible zoning for the harbor.
David Wiggins
Redondo Beach
No publicity stunt
Dear ER:
I have never written an editorial before, but after reading the very misleading and one-sided article about the Power Plant (“Brand leads protest against power plant,” E.R., Sept. 16, 2010). I felt compelled to write this response. For Councilman Aspel to call the rally a “publicity stunt” is quite insulting to the residents participating in the rally and the hundreds of residents who supported the effort through honking and verbal affirmations. I attended the rally along with my two children, ages 10 and 12. We were there to inform other residents that we have an opportunity to do something as a city against the rebuilding of the power plant. The City Council has not acted on this opportunity and has kept the residents uninformed and uneducated that the City has an opportunity to end the industrialized zoning of the power plant land.
My children and my participation in the rally was hardly for publicity. My children do not even know what a “publicity stunt” is, but they do know that the power plant is ugly, dirty, loud (when it does actually operate) and blocks their view of the ocean. I am a long time Redondo Beach resident and homeowner who doesn’t understand why a power plant that is inefficient and rarely operates, which clearly indicates unneeded and unessential power generation, must stay in a beautiful and residential waterfront area like Redondo Beach. It just doesn’t make sense from an economic, environmental and life value standpoint for the Redondo Beach residents and homeowners.
Dawn Esser
Redondo Beach
G is good for Redondo
Dear ER:
We are writing today to ask for your help. On November 2, 2010, Redondo Beach residents will vote to consider approving the City’s Local Coastal Plan for the harbor area. The city is required by California State Law to have a Local Coastal Plan for our waterfront.
Measure G is about a Redondo Beach coastal zoning ordinance that was developed by our city through public meetings involving residents, citizen groups and community leaders over a 10 year span with thousands of hours of public input through workshops and hearings.
We ask that we come together as a community and protect the future of our harbor area by voting Yes on Measure G, which supports the following: Parks, open space and recreational facilities as allowable uses of the AES Power Plant site; No new residential development allowed on the power plant site or west of North Harbor Drive; Limits on the size of development in the harbor.
Additionally, the Local Coastal Plan will give Redondo Beach local permitting authority subject to all provisions of our City Charter and result in more effective planning for our Harbor; while still maintaining the public’s right to make appeals to the California Coastal Commission.
Redondo Beach United needs your help to preserve and protect the future of our seaside and our quality of life. Please offer your support by volunteering to the campaign or by making a contribution in support of our efforts. For more information please visit our website at www.RedondoBeachUnited.com or contact us at:
Redondo Beach United, P.O. Box 712, Redondo Beach, CA 90277. Email: info@RedondoBeachUnited.com. (310) 245-8115.
Mike Gin
Mayor, Redondo Beach
Redondo Beach United
Chris Cagle
Former City Council Member, District 2
Redondo Beach United
Do nothing council
Dear ER:
In 2004, Redondo Beach’s staff report recommended the removal of the AES Power Plant, describing it as “the major blighting influence in the area due to the size of the site, the visual impact of the use on surrounding areas and the undesirable environmental impacts on the use that effect the public health, safety and welfare.”
(Review report: http://laserweb.redondo.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=59711&dbid=0.)
Despite their staff recommendation, Mayor Mike Gin, the majority of City Council and City Manager Bill Workman are doing nothing to stop AES from repowering with a new, full-scale power plant or to stop West Basin from striking a deal with AES to build a huge desalination plant. There are legal and legislative means that Redondo can use to sunset this aging plant and prevent a new one from emerging, including petitioning the California Energy Commission (CEC), which must approve of AES’s repowering. Other communities have already paved the way.
Since the Redondo city government has done nothing on behalf of the vast majority of South Bay residents, we need to do the work. If you would like to help, visit www.southbayparks.org and www.buildingabetterredondo.org to volunteer/contribute. Also, write to the CEC, and contact US Representative Jane Harman, LA County Supervisor Don Knabe, State Senator Jenny Oropeza and soon to be State Assemblymember Betsy Butler to influence the Redondo City Council to act on our behalf. Redondo residents should Vote “NO” on G because Measure G allows the AES Power Plant to rebuild with a huge desalination plant.
John Wike
Redondo Beach
Julia Kovisars
Fact checker
Dear ER:
Some just plain wrong information has been printed in this paper about Measure G, serving to confuse, or even mislead, Redondo Beach voters.
I’m specifically referring to repeated claims that Measure G will somehow “rid our city of the AES power plant.” The official analysis of the Measure G amendment clearly shows that this is not the case: “…the AES Generating Plant, however, would remain as a permissible use with or without the [Measure G] amendments …”
What’s more, those who are trying to “tear down the plant” to replace it with a park will be shocked to learn that only by passing Measure G would any of the existing AES land be zoned for parks or recreation. Again, from the official analysis: “The new Generating Plant designation would also allow parks and open space as permitted future uses of the property.”
I know everyone is busy, but the only way to know for sure what you are voting for is to read it. You can do so for yourself at: www.redondo.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID+20831.
Steve Goldstein, Chair
Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce
Building a Better City – Yes on Measure G
‘No’ not the answer
Dear ER:
As a Redondo Beach resident who wants a vibrant community that encourages investment in our harbor and pier areas, I believe we desperately need Measure G to pass on November 2. While our neighboring beach cities in Manhattan and Hermosa take steps to improve their downtown areas adjacent to their waterfronts, opponents of Measure G continue to oppose much needed infrastructure improvements in our own harbor/pier areas that have left us behind. Measure G would create much needed building limits to keep density down, traffic at acceptable levels, and most important, zoning that will give investors the predictability and certainty that must exist if we are ever going to improve our own waterfront.
Measure G will finally give residents the opportunity to move the city forward in a very cautious and constructive manner. Continuing to “just say no” is not the answer I will accept since it prevents taking the steps needed to turn our harbor and pier areas into the world-class improvements they have the potential of becoming. “Just saying no” prohibits us from moving ahead as we need to.
The clear action on November 2 is saying “YES” on Measure G to avoid costly lawsuits, control growth, and save money.
Michael Jackson
Redondo Beach Harbor Commissioner
