Tucker’d out
Dear ER:
Since the newly Hermosa Beach city council members began their tenure, has a council meeting ended before midnight? The last council meeting went to 1 a.m., arguing over language that the city attorney had worked on for at least five months. The length of these meetings is an indicator of the dysfunction of the entire Council. Hermosa needs leaders.
Rebecca Votto
Hermosa Beach
Skate patrol
I would like to thank Hermosa Beach City Manager Tom Blakeley and the City Council for restoring the personnel monitor at the city’s skate park. Three months of chaos occurred when an attempt at self monitoring was implemented. The skate park has been in existence for 15 years and in all of those years, except for those three months, it has been an asset to the community. With the monitor in place a safe skateboarding experience can be had by young, beginning riders as well as experienced skaters.
Manhattan Beach is looking into building a new skate park. I hope they will look at the history of the Hermosa skate park recognize that it can be a great asset if done in the right way. I have grandchildren ages 5, 8 and 10 and enjoy taking them to the skate park here in Hermosa Beach.
Robert Dobbie
Hermosa Beach
Park it
Here is exactly the problem at the Redondo High School athletic parking. The residents who complain about the parking do not use their permit parking. Vincent street on a Wednesday night at 6:30 p.m. with no athletic event going on is nearly empty on the south, permit side. The residents park in their own driveway or they fill the north, Redondo high side of the street. Is it because the permits cost money?
Wasn’t the residents’ complaint that they can’t park in front of their own houses? Well they don’t, even when there is space.
Tom Judson
Hermosa Beach
Two of Hermosa’s elected officials stooped to new lows in conduct at the last Hermosa Beach City Council meeting. School Board Member Lisa Claypoole gave a long winded diatribe about how opponents of School Bond Measure Q were “anti-children.” A week earlier, Claypoole, defended the School District’s construction of a gymnasium rather than building much needed classrooms.\Two of Hermosa’s elected officials stooped to new lows in conduct at the last Hermosa Beach City Council meeting. School Board Member Lisa Claypoole gave a long winded diatribe about how opponents of School Bond Measure Q were “anti-children.” A week earlier, Claypoole, defended the School District’s construction of a gymnasium rather than building much needed classrooms.Playing the kids cardPlaying the kids card
Later in the evening (actually, early morning), Councilmember Carolyn Petty attacked her colleague Nanette Barragan for having concerns about Measure Q and implying that Barragan is also anti-children. Do Claypoole and Petty believe that the many voters who voted No on Q are anti-children? Will they be able to look folks in the eye and say “You voted No on Q. You’re anti-children?” I am one of those folks so I look forward to Claypoole and Petty telling me to my face that I’m anti-children.
Fred Huebscher
Hermosa Beach
Shake loose with school report
The City of Hermosa Beach and Hermosa Beach School District administration has cited earthquake standards and building requirements in the State Education Construction Code that make it cost prohibitive to reopen the Community Center as a school.
There has been no report offered by the city or district that would back up these assertion.In June 2014, we requested all information regarding the Community Center, citing the Freedom of Information Act. There is no report that states the Community Center does not meet certain earthquake standards. In fact, the Community Center is the city’s designated operations hub in the event of a major earthquake or disaster. According to the Hermosa Beach Disaster Service Workers it is deemed to be safer than the police and fire department building.
There has been no study released that has assessed the cost of returning the Community Center to district use. The Office of Public School Construction did not disqualify use of the community Center in their March 2014 assessment. The only requirement to its use is a 40 year lease. Without a full examination of all of the possible options, how do we know that moving forward with 500 students at North School is the option that best serves our community?
Miyo Prassas
Hermosa Beach
Boat has left the harbor
As a 22-year resident of North Redondo Beach, I am compelled to speak up in support of the revitalization of our waterfront. Because of the abysmal condition of our waterfront, we take visiting family and friends to Hermosa or Manhattan. I can’t comprehend why councilman Bill Brand and his small but vocal compadres continue to fight against revitalization. Seemingly, their opposition is founded on a basis of proprietary entitlement to dictate every detail of any proposed development of this public space.
When Redondo Beach Measure G passed, the guidelines set forth should have been a salve to the opposition – not. Visceral misrepresentations of the CenterCal project and AES plans continue. Brand recently opined that “the timing is perfect to start over” and create a “comprehensive vision.”
The time has been perfect for the last 20 years and nothing has happened. Now there are two projects that are separate but complementary; and rather than expend efforts to create a comprehensive vision, Brand wants to start the entire lengthy process over. This is a delay tactic whose time has passed.
Ideally, all Redondo Beach residents – North and South – will agree to move forward in support of beautification and revitalization of our waterfront. The CenterCal project would enable improved access to and enjoyment of our waterfront. The terms walkability, bikeability and livability would be more than ideas – they would be a way of life.
Arnette Travis
Redondo Beach
Harbor master CenterCal
The Redondo Beach city council has locked up another year with CenterCal developers for pier redevelopment by agreeing to continue their exclusive contract. Mayor Aspel and councilmen Jeff Ginsburg, Matt Kilroy and Pat Aust refuse to see the need for continued debate for this project. It’s massive size is double that of the plaza El Segundo (Sepulveda and Manhattan Beach Blvd). The public was only given eight meetings to participate. Residents have still not seen any plan views, except a few, two dimensional drawings. There is no plan online at the Centercal website. If Council had let CenterCal’s contract run to its yearly conclusion, the City would have had the advantage of allowing alternative ideas to be included in the plan. By shutting out groups such as R4, Building a Better Redondo, the South Bay Parkland Conservancy and others Council has denied proper representation at the bargaining table. Now it belongs to a developer whose sole intention is Return on Investment. Please go to facebook.com/rightsizeredondo and King Harbor — A Harbor not a Mall on Facebook. Revitalize our beloved harbor, don’t destroy it.
Melanie Cohen
Redondo Beach
Deep six it
Dear ER:
I recently discussed land use plans in Redondo Beach with members of Build a Better Redondo. Areas discussed were the CenterCal project, the AES main plant project, power lines, and the defunct Bristol Farms property. I received surprisingly consistent statements: “No piecemeal development.” “No increased traffic.” “No back-room planning shenanigans.”
NoGrowthers are surprisingly adept at stating what they don’t want.
I asked, “Why don’t we put the boat ramp closer to the yacht club instead of in the middle of the prime recreational space?” “Why does so much asphalt block our ocean in this area?”
The answer has been, “Hey, this is a marina and that’s how marinas are.” It’s such an eighties answer. Our model for the marina should not be Marina del Rey or Dana Point. Our plan should not be to favor some 1,500 boat owners over the rest of the region. We should come up with a lifestyle center for the other 99.8 percent of us walkers and bikers and not just for the folks who, let’s face it, take their dollars and drive them out to sea for the day.
To NoGrowthers, our waterfront is a pass-through to the ocean, not a place to be enjoyed for its own sake. Our visitors, whether from Asia or Europe, will remember the Redondo Beach harbor front for the amenities they enjoy along the water, the meals they ate here, and likely something they bought here. Let’s show them a good time with some great restaurants, shops, and even a spiffy water fountain.
What’s wrong with me taking my wife here for a movie, sipping a latte, a glass of wine, and buying some designer wear? Should we listen to critics whose best comments range from “No” to “I don’t know”? Say, NoGrowthers, why not take a month and produce this plan you complain about not having.
Charlie Szymanski
Redondo Beach
Oil’s property tax
There may be financial incentives for oil drilling. But these city financial incentives may be null once the tax implications hit. Real estate prices will drop (and therefore property taxes) because most people don’t want to live near an oil site. The restaurant and retail taxes may drop, as a result of tourists not wanting to vacation near an oil site. Yes, we are aware of the detrimental environmental impacts. But the biggest effect may be the local political system that starts working for the biggest company in town, which would be the oil company. Hermosa Beach politics may turn into an oil company puppet show. Let’s keep Hermosa Beach working for its own citizens.
Sara Hadden
Hermosa Beach
Tourists flourish
I find it hard to believe that the process of oil and gas recovery will have a negative effect on tourism and livability, when neighboring oil producing cities are successfully attracting people to live within their borders. Hermosa Beach resident Andre Sharp in his recent letter to the editor titled “Oil’s impact” discussed the potential ill effects recovering oil would have on people visiting and residing in the community. You don’t have to drive more than 50 miles down our beautiful coast to see communities that are safely recovering oil and providing their residents with a fiscally sound place to reside.
Long Beach, Huntington Beach, and Newport Beach have built residential communities and tourist attractions without the ramifications stated by Sharp. What do they know that we do not? They have used oil revenue to help maintain their beautiful beaches and build tourist attractions without serious incident.
The City’s own Cost Benefit Analysis found that it would be unlikely that a significant number of tourists, if any, would not visit the City should the project be implemented and that Tidelands revenue could be used for services and improvements that generally align with tourism.
It is apparent that the fears propounded by Sharp have not affected the livability of the three coastal cities discussed previously. I urge anyone who wants to see what oil production looks like within a community to visit any of these cities, and see how the city and its people are doing.
Chuck Decker
Hermosa Beach
Keeping up with the neighbors
The Hermosa Beach City Council has again decided to waste $72,000 a year on a city publicist. Councilwoman Carolyn Petty suggested that this was a bargain because Manhattan Beach is spending $125,000, plus benefits for one and our publicist is actually a consultant who receives no benefits or pension. Petty fails to understand that when a person is employed by a city, that person answers to the city manager and department heads. The city has far less control over a consultant. Also, just because Manhattan Beach is paying more does not mean Hermosa Beach has to “keep up with the Joneses.” Petty also has a short memory. The city council was paying $120,000 a year for a publicist until that publicist resigned because of questions by Councilwoman Nannette Barragan.
Bertha Baumgartner
Hermosa Beach
These are the good times
The Hermosa Beach City Council met last week for a fiscal health study session. The session determined that while ongoing revenue exceeds ongoing expenses now, it will not be possible to fund identified capital needs and rising personnel costs associated with first class services into the future without significant adjustments to revenue, expenditures, and service levels. Currently, our revenues exceed our expenses. However, when the city looks at what happens when an annual cost of $1.6 million for much needed capital improvements and $800,000 per year for repayment of the oil settlement loan (if oil doesn’t pass) is added, the scenario changes. By the year 2017 expenses will exceed revenues, and beyond that the scenario gets worse. It isn’t until a parcel tax is imposed on residents that revenue could start to exceed expenses again. This is something for voters to think about when it comes time to make a decision on the oil recovery project. I would like to see revenue exceed expenses so that we can pay for much needed expenditure projects. The proposed oil recovery project will accomplish that for us in two ways. First, we’ll have incoming revenue for the city, and second, we will be forgiven of the $17.5 million settlement repayment.
Lorie Armendariz
Hermosa Beach
