Letters to the Editor 10-9-25

If it ain’t broke, park it

Dear ER:

Two years ago, the then Hermosa Beach City Council created a problem where there was none. It changed the beach parking permit system for residents in the coastal zone. This negatively affected over a thousand residents by radically restricting the issuance of parking passes. The issuance of passes was not linked to vehicles owned by the people living there, but to vehicles registered in the coastal zone. Due to this and other ridiculous restrictions, only three passes were allowed (four if you had no garage). In addition, the one guest pass was taken away completely.  Many people who lived in the impacted zones were no longer eligible for a parking pass – even though they had received one for years. With the thankful change of the city council in the last election, we now have a chance to right the wrongs of the last administration.

This issue is coming in front of the City Council next week, on October 14,  at 6 p.m. If you are affected by the change, like me and so many of my neighbors, you should attend, sign up to speak, and make your views known. We are looking simply to return to the previous policy, which worked well for the past 40 years. This is the time for us to let the City Council know how much our parking plan means to us and to explain that it is because we live in the coastal impacted zone, and not because we are “privileged,” as has been suggested by some looking to make this a political issue.

Sam Edgerton

Hermosa Beach

Punish the offenders

Dear ER:

There will be a discussion of parking permits at the upcoming Hermosa Beach City Council meeting, on October 14. The City Council made sweeping changes to the permit system a couple of years ago that made it nearly impossible to obtain permits. The restrictions on obtaining permits are far too strict, to a point where property owners in the impacted area cannot buy passes. This might explain why the council had to implement huge increases in parking fines to cover shortfalls. The councilmen who championed the change claim there was widespread abuse, which is completely untrue. There were a few people who took advantage of a system that has otherwise worked seamlessly for decades. Rather than punish the offenders, the council went after the masses. The City Council needs to take action to ensure everyone affected has the opportunity to buy a parking pass.

Rob McGarry

A fire under the pols

Dear ER:

We had just installed bi-fold doors on the front of our house and saw the Chevron Refinery  explosion unfold in full view from our couch while watching TV. The sound and the shaking of the ground were staggering, and the fireball towered for nearly half an hour. I was stunned to learn no one was killed—had anyone been near that section of the plant, the outcome would have been tragic. I dislike exaggeration, but this is no overstatement. The enormity of this explosion is inexcusable. Minor incidents and accidents are one thing, but a failure of this magnitude warrants a thorough and transparent investigation. I have no interest in public relations spin or cover-ups, which Chevron is notorious for. Let’s not forget: they previously admitted to faulty exposure to Manhattan Beach a couple of years ago and paid a settlement only after first insisting everything was fine. That incident was minor in comparison. The nothing to see here attitude I am witnessing from local officials is very concerning. I agree the emergency response teams did an incredible job. That is separate from the fact that an explosion of this size had to be the result of negligence on some front. With all due respect, I would appreciate it if the Mayor of El Segundo and our Los Angeles County Supervisor, Holly Mitchell, would step up and ensure that all outside agencies monitoring the refinery conduct a complete and transparent investigation. All surrounding cities are entitled to be aware of the risks illustrated by this event.

Stewart Fournier

Manhattan Beach

Park or politics

Dear ER:

When Redondo Beach is in a $3.5 million budget shortfall, is it ethical to spend nearly $1 million dollars on land the public doesn’t even own (“Groundbreaking ceremony for Herondo open space,” ER Sept. 26, 2025)? If taxpayers fund grading, irrigation, and landscaping on leased land, what happens when the lease expires — do we walk away with nothing to show for it? Should a park built on borrowed ground be celebrated as legacy, or questioned as a “legacy on loan”?

Why has the City never disclosed the full lease terms with SoCal Edison, and how can residents judge whether this is wise stewardship without transparency? And while we’re talking about legacy — the only reason the AES power plant still sits on our coast is because former Mayor  Bill Brand and Mayor Jim Light turned it into a political tool. For years, voters were told the site would be re-wilded into a park, but instead it’s been kept fenced off, tied up in lawsuits and bankruptcies that served as fundraising fuel more than community benefit.

So the questions practically ask themselves:
• If the real goal was removing the smokestacks, why isn’t that achieved after decades of “activism?”
• Did constant opposition to redevelopment proposals protect the public, or preserve the plant as a political symbol?
• Who actually benefited from keeping this fight alive: the residents of Redondo Beach, or the politicians who built their careers on it?

Until we get clear, honest answers, residents are left paying for parks and promises while the AES site — the heart of this issue — remains nothing more than a backdrop for political branding.

Pat Healy

ERNews comment

Politics equals park

Dear ER:

The lease for the five acres under the powerlines west of Pacific Coast Highway is $3020.54 a year (that’s $604.10 per acre per year). It was unanimously approved at the City Council meeting on May 17, 2022. So this was fully disclosed and conducted with full transparency and approved by Councilmembers Nils Nehrenheim, Todd Loewenstein, Christian Horvath, Laura Emdee, and Zein Obagi. 

The money spent on the park is not from the General Fund, which has the shortfall.

In addition to Redondo, many other cities lease SCE Right of Way property for public parkland and open space, including El Segundo and Torrance. These parks and our North Redondo bike path have been leased for many years.

The only path to a power plant removal before December 31, 2023 would have been a vote for Measure A, drafted by former Mayor Bill Brand and myself. It qualified for the ballot but was narrowly defeated when AES spent over $600,000 to oppose it. They threatened power outages and lawsuits. The 2002 failed Heart of the City zoning allowed for a new smaller power plant on the AES property. After Measure A failed, AES tried to get us to pass a mixed use zoning plan with Measure B. It failed. But the provisions of Measure B allowed the current power plant to run as long as AES could get a contract – which turned out to be until December 31, 2023. So it was the defeat of Measure A that allowed the power plant to run until December 31, 2023.

The current bankruptcy has nothing to do with the City. AES sold the property to Leo Pustilnikov and then foreclosed on him when he failed to meet payment terms. The day before the property auction, Pustilnikov filed bankruptcy leaving the property in limbo.

Our efforts to protect the harbor area have been successful. The harbor is going through revitalization without over development. Our efforts to shut down the power plant were also ultimately successful. Redondo residents no longer suffer the pollution from the least efficient and most polluting of the remaining “once through cooling” power plants. Billions of marine life larvae are saved each year. AES Redondo was our largest point source of air pollution in Redondo. And with westerly winds, marine layers, and the uphill topography leading eastward, those pollutants were directly impinging on residential neighborhoods, medical offices, and schools.

It’s all a matter of public record. And soon we will enjoy our first sizable park addition in decades.

Jim Light

Mayor

Redondo Beach

Redistricting in context

Dear ER:

While concerns about gerrymandering and fiscal responsibility are valid topics for discussion, the characterization of Congressional redistricting measures AB604 and Proposition 50 conflates multiple issues and lacks important context (“Prop 50 a Presidential prop,” ER October 2, 2025).

Independent Redistricting, California’s Citizens Redistricting Commission, was created to remove partisan influence from district mapping. Proposition 11 and subsequent reforms were designed to ensure fair representation, not to give governors unchecked power. Suspending the commission would actually reduce transparency and accountability, which could worsen political manipulation rather than prevent it.

AB604 is primarily aimed at adjusting timelines and procedures for future redistricting. Its passage is not a personal power grab for Governor Gavin Newsom; decisions about district lines remain constrained by law and public input. Claiming the governor will redraw districts purely for political gain is speculative and not supported by the legislative language itself.

While redistricting and infrastructure projects carry costs, the figures cited—$250 million for redistricting and $20 billion for the train—are exaggerated without context. Infrastructure investment can provide long-term economic benefits, and redistricting costs are a fraction of the state budget.

Linking a single state bill to national presidential ambitions is conjecture. Policy decisions are complex and involve multiple stakeholders, not just one individual’s political trajectory.

Proposition 50 should be evaluated on its merits—whether it preserves independent redistricting and fair representation—not based on assumptions about the governor’s ambitions or unrelated budget items. Protecting nonpartisan mapping helps ensure that California voters, not politicians, determine representation. Read the full story. Know the details and make an informed choice on prop 50.

KC Ellis

ERNews comment