Don’t get Encinita-vized
Dear ER:
I grew up in Manhattan Beach, surfing, playing volleyball and living the California dream. I was lucky to live in a small-town beach community whose coastal charm set the tone for how generations have wanted to live their lives. Even though I now live in Encinitas, I attended the April 19 Manhattan Beach Housing Forum with several of my lifelong friends who were concerned about the city’s future. Encinitas has already experienced the out-of-control development my friends are about to witness in Manhattan Beach, and it’s awful. The city of Encinitas has built a 70-unit apartment building just a block from the beach, with just 12 “affordable” units. There are three other projects under construction throughout the city with a total of 500 units. These developments have transformed our quaint and quiet beach town into a high-density city that lacks the infrastructure to support such massive developments. Even worse, we now have single family homes next to seven-story apartment buildings. The housing mandates from Sacramento make all this possible without any input from residents, the city council and planning commission. It breaks my heart that this is happening in my hometown of Manhattan Beach. We all need to fight these housing bills that are transforming our beautiful coastal communities into high-rise nightmares like Miami Beach. Don’t let it happen in Manhattan Beach, or any other city in the South Bay. Speak up and fight this madness.
Mike Lewis
Encinitas
Sea Hawks flying low
Dear ER:
All Ball columnist Paul Teetor states Redondo Union parents must have “hated the habitual losing even more than they hated seeing their local kids lose playing time” (“Coach Reggie Has Sea Hawks Flying High Again,” ER March 20, 2025). I wonder if the author spoke to any parents at Redondo Union, especially those with kids in the program. It seems like a conversation with these parents might have given the author a very different perspective. The real issue for many parents isn’t just the large number of transfers, but the preferential treatment these new players are getting. Sadly, it feels like the school and administration are more focused on winning than on giving local kids a fair shot at playing time, leaving the concerns of parents overlooked.
For comparison, Mira Costa’s strong performance this season—despite having far fewer transfers—proves you can still have a competitive program without sidelining homegrown talent. As a result of what’s happening at Redondo, many local students are either transferring out, or leaving the program when they realize they’re not getting the same opportunities as the incoming transfers. I really hope the author and the community will take the time to consider the concerns of the parents and students directly affected by this situation. It’s important to think about how this could impact the future of the program.
Jay Nomans
Redondo Beach
Sportsmanship politicized
Dear ER:
I just want to say what a hateful negative person Paul Teeter is as a sports reporter (All Ball: Dodgers instant karma,” ER April 17, 2025). His report on the Dodgers visit to the White House was a disgusting, bigoted piece, full of his own political bias. It should have been labeled an opinion piece instead of a sports report. It reminded me to never read sports articles in Easy Reader. Why would an editor allow such repugnant opinions to be voiced in the sports section?
Rick Murray
E-mail comment
Likes vs. facts
Dear ER:
At a recent Hermosa Beach City Council meeting, Mayor Dean Francois interrupted a colleague during deliberation—without cause or justification. Residents have asked what happened. The answer is simple: The Mayor didn’t like the facts.
Here are the facts:
A resident was cited for operating an illegal short-term rental (STR). Mayor Francois then requested a council agenda item on short-term rentals, using that same illegal operator, who is suing the city, as justification. Councilmember Mike Keegan, who was expelled from an administrative hearing on Hermosa Beach’s short-term rental regulations and later remarked, “I didn’t want to get into a fistfight, so I left”—has publicly supported expanding them in the city. He backed the Mayor’s request.
Concerned by this direction, a Hermosa Beach resident wrote to the State’s Housing and Community Development Department (HCD), raising the alarm that our city was pushing for more short-term rentals. They were right to be concerned. Short-term rentals drive up housing costs and reduce long-term rental availability.
To clarify, the STR matter was addressed publicly: it was not the City of Hermosa Beach pushing for more short-term rentals. It was not the Council as a whole. It was the mayor and Councilmember Keegan who were advocating for that expansion.
Hermosa Beach already permits up to 148 short-term rentals in commercial zones, yet only 20 are currently operating legally. That discrepancy is serious. It deserves scrutiny—not deflection.
And if HCD (California Department of Housing and Community Development) and Sacramento are truly serious about tackling California’s housing crisis, they need to support cities like ours—cities committed to real housing solutions, not ones being sidetracked by special interests profiting from short-term rentals. It’s time for the state to stop giving cover to those interests at the expense of long-term housing stability.
Public discourse—especially in city government—must be protected. Community members have the right to speak without interruption, whether from the mayor or councilmembers. Likewise, councilmembers have the right to respond, to challenge, and to speak freely on behalf of their constituents. Disagreeing with someone is not grounds to cut them off. Disagreement is not a disorder. And if the goal is to stifle debate, those doing so will need something stronger than vague appeals to “decorum.”
Raymond A. Jackson
City Councilmember
City of Hermosa Beach
A healthy residency test
Dear ER:
In “District border not a wall,” Beach Cities Health District CEO Tom Bakaly argues that BCHD has the authority to offer programs that service non-residents. First off, let’s clear up the “and others” he cites to support his claim that BCHD can provide programs outside the District. The only reason that the District lawyers added “and others” to the Superior Court language for the hospital’s use was because the District planned to seek federal funding under the Hill-Burton Act. Hill-Burton required that hospitals that took those funds accepted all comers for the limited purpose of emergency services. Had “and others” not been included, the Hill-Burton funding that paid for part of the hospital’s build would not have been accessible to the District. Never did voters (resident-taxpayers of only three cities) expect that BCHD would enter into servicing and subsidizing non-residents. For instance, allcove’s service area is LA County SPA8 which is 91% non-residents of the District. And the PACE program that BCHD is planning will service 95% non-residents according to National PACE Association data. District residents have long subsidized AdventurePlex and Center for Health and Fitness operations, including the memberships and services to non-residents. Over the years, resident-taxpayers of the District have paid the District over $100 million in property taxes and allowed the revenues from our taxpayer-owned land and buildings to serve as a bucket of money for BCHD to spend however it likes. Hill-Burton requirements have long ended for the District when the publicly-owned hospital had financial failure in 1984 and was rented out to a private company until 1998. It’s high time BCHD institutes a residency test and requires 100% fully-loaded compensatory fees for any non-resident usage. No longer should residents fund buildings or programs for non-residents.
Mark Nelson
Redondo Beach
Rosecrans residential
Dear ER:
Simply put, for Manhattan Beach to move the Residential Overlay District (ROD) to Rosecrans Avenue from State Highway 1, Sepulveda Boulevard, would be a “win, win”. Residents would “win” because high-rise residential developments would not be in their backyard, towering over their homes and causing adverse impacts upon the health, safety. Our State and City would “win” because high-rise residential, mixed-use development along Rosecrans Avenue would result in significantly more housing and, importantly, more affordable housing being built in our Manhattan Beach. With the ROD moved to Rosecrans Avenue, high-end, responsible developers would see more of an opportunity to invest in our City. Finally, our City and community would “win” economically. With the ROD moved to Rosecrans Avenue, it would create a vibrant, diverse “15 Minute Neighborhood,” with every amenity available to our new residents, including grocery stores, retail stores for clothing and other items, golf, swimming and a great menu of dining opportunities. I hope our Manhattan Beach will urge the State’s Housing and Community Development Department to amend our Housing Element to move the ROD to Rosecrans Avenue, to the benefit of all.
Mark Burton
Manhattan Beach
Health has no borders
Dear ER:
As an 85-year-old HB resident who has taken advantage of BCHD offerings, I am happy to know that residents of neighboring communities use the Beach City’s gym and attend free fitness sessions. As health professionals know, the state of my health does not end at our cities’ borders. Tom Bakaly, CEO of the Beach Cities Health District, was named “Man of the Year” by the Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce at its 115th Community Awards (December 2022). Lovely to read Tom’s reasoned response to the relentless rantings of those few in Redondo who fear hoards from Torrance and El Segundo will overwhelm BCHD.
Liz Brubaker
Hermosa Beach
