Letters to the Editor: RB power plant

mi_02_03_13

Power plant Q&A

Dear ER:

Thanks to the League of Women Voters for sponsoring the recent Measure A forum. There are additional questions I would like answered:

1) Measure A prohibits dense development and no residential (remember Heart of the City?). Will AES guarantee in writing they will not densely develop and also prohibit residential units on the land not covered by a new power plant? We all know they will jam as much development into the land as possible. If Measure A does not pass, we will be stuck with dense development, including residential housing and greatly increased traffic congestion.

2) Eric Pendergraft of AES states the new plant is cleaner, but what counts to our health is total emissions. Will the new power plant produce more or less toxic pollutants than it does now? The answer is more. Per AES plans, the new plant will run more frequently resulting in increased hazardous emissions. I agree with Jim Light who said, “Right now Redondo does not meet state or federal standards (for air quality). You add a new power plant and you are just going to make the situation worse.”

3) Why won’t AES consider a solution without a power plant? AES can sell the property to developers or develop it themselves without a power plant. They are interested in maximizing profit, not our well-being. Measure A is the only way to ensure no dense development, no condos, reduced traffic congestion, no toxic air pollution. Protect Redondo Beach, not AES. Vote Yes on A!

Jim Montgomery

Torrance

Better for environment

Dear ER:

In response to incorrect information in Mr. Reardon’s letter in last week’s Easy Reader, all required air modeling, including the referenced dispersion modeling, has been completed for our proposed new power plant. The results, which are public record and included in our CEC application, indicate that if the new plant is operating at its maximum potential emissions rate during the worst possible atmospheric conditions, the highest ground-level concentration of particulate matter emissions from our plant is less than 6% of the allowable federal standard and less than 2% of the state standard.

Given all the conflicting information out there, you may be wondering what to believe. I encourage you to use your judgment and draw your own conclusions. We are proposing to replace 60-year-old technology with a new state-of-the-art facility. We are reducing the capacity of the site from 1,300 to 500 MWs. The project will meet every air quality regulation in one of the toughest states in the country and it will enable more wind and solar resources. The new plant will indeed be better for the environment.

Regarding the potential need for the new plant, we can’t make any definitive statements today about whether it will be needed 10 to 15 years from now but we can apply some common sense. Between now and 2021, over 5,000 MWs, or the equivalent of 10 plants the size of our proposed new facility, are expected to retire in the Western Los Angeles Basin. In addition, it is not clear if the massive San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station is ever going to return to service. And finally, our plans already call for the permanent retirement of 800 MWs at the Redondo site, or more than 60% of the existing capacity. Given these facts and the difficulty finding new power plant sites in the heavily urbanized LA Basin, there is a strong possibility that the last 500 MWs at Redondo Beach may be needed in the future to ensure the region has a reliable supply of electricity. It is prudent to begin preparing for that potential need.

Eric Pendergraft, president

AES Southland

Un-American

Dear ER:

For some time I have been trying to verbalize why the vast majority of the people I speak with are so vehemently against Measure A.

My father (a former Redondo Beach Councilman) and I were recently discussing the Middle East and questioning why the region cannot seem to live in peace. I surmised many countries either have a strong dictator with a brutal secret police or, if a democracy, the ruling class is always trying to take away the rights of the people, so they revolt.

My father replied with a great observation, “The foundation of our country is all men are created equal and have a fundamental right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. However, this also means each one of us must allow our fellow countrymen the freedom to also pursue these rights.”

It was then I realized why so many residents are against Measure A. Those in favor of Measure A are pushing their personal desires onto the property owner without any consideration for the owner’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Measure A flies in the face of our county’s most fundamental truths. Truths that have become part of our DNA.

Measure A attempts to rezone private property without the consent of the property owner, sucking the value out of the land and trampling the owner’s individual liberties. Proponents can try to justify their position all they want. At its core, Measure A is simply un-American.

John Mirassou

Redondo Beach

John Mirassou is paid consultant for AES, performing public outreach on the company’s behalf

 

Saber rattling

Dear ER:

AES Southland President Eric Pendergraft kicked off Tuesday night’s community forum on Measure A by immediately shifting attention away from the self incriminating application he’s filed with the California Energy Commission, for that application defines a MASSIVE (5-15X!!) increase in particulate emissions. Instead, Pendergraft opened with some inane, nonsensical analogy of how a family car is used. As an automotive engineer, I was so offended I could only laugh in disgust at such a sad, obvious attempt to grasp at anything to stay off the facts.

By once again rattling his legal saber, Pendergraft also alluded to the fallacy that Measure A’s rezoning can somehow be construed as a “taking.” As a past Planning Commission Chairman, I know any such claim to be categorically untrue. Not only does Measure A provide fair profitability on AES’ long-ago amortized investment, but such rezoning falls well within the city’s authority, particularly in light of AES’ regular and blatant violations of the specific conditions of their city land use permit.

Similarly illogical are those unthinking analogies to a ‘taking’ of one’s residential property. For starters, no home produces even 1% of the neighborhood pollution that AES so uncaringly does.

Shame on AES for thinking the voters of Redondo are so gullible and ignorant as to fall for such deception and misrepresentation.

The only way to end the unethical, moneyed chokehold AES seems to have on the Redondo Council and Chamber is for Redondo voters to turn out in droves to VOTE YES on A!

Gerry O’Connor

Manhattan Beach

Scant money for park

Dear ER,

The NoPowerPlant folks claim that Redondo taxpayers would not have to pay for a park on the AES site, and they say that they do not need funding clauses for the eventual purchase of AES’s land because that funding will either magically appear from private investors, or be provided by the California Coastal Conservancy. Well, no sane investor will pay for and maintain 35+ acres of park for 12 acres of limited development… so that just leaves the CCC. Mr. Light, co-author of Measure A, seems to be pretty friendly with the CCC, seeing how he virtually promises they will swoop in and pay for the entire project. From his blog: “The State Coastal Conservancy has pledged to help Redondo put work the funding sources.”

This seemed strange, considering California’s budget problems, so I decided to look into the Conservancy… and as it turns out, they’re hurting for funding, badly. From their updated “5-Year Plan,” which was published in December 2012:

“Funding is declining for both Conservancy projects and operations and future funding will have to come from new sources. During this transition, we will need to regularly reassess our remaining funding and adjust spending rates, organizational structure, and our work priorities… As a result, the Conservancy will focus on completing projects that we have worked on for years. It is unlikely that we will initiate any new, large scale, long-term projects.”

The CCC will not receive any new funding unless a new statewide bond is passed, which they think is unlikely due to state economic conditions. If the CCC does take a role at the AES site, it will purely be as an advisory position, and we won’t see a cent out of them; they have bigger priorities. They can try to help us attract funding from other sources, but those sources are just as dry, and for the same reasons. It’s time to accept the truth: if Measure A is passed and a park is built, the only ones paying for Mr. Light’s pet project will be the taxpayers of Redondo Beach.

Josh Obear

Redondo Beach

AES-China link

Dear ER:

As you have probably seen in the news, China has been choking on smog lately, thanks in part to AES, the owner of the AES-Redondo power plant. The Beijing Government recommends people stay inside, flights are cancelled for lack of visibility through the smog, thousands are hospitalized, and thousands will die prematurely. A large part of the blame for their air pollution is on the many coal-fired power plants in China – consuming as much coal as the rest of the world combined. AES’ largest shareholder is the People’s Republic of China Government, which is on their Board of Directors, and AES built or partnered on four coal-burning power plants in China over the last two decades. Fact: AES and the Chinese Government are currently partnered in the construction of a new coal-burning power plant in Vietnam.

Also, the propaganda they are currently distributing to Redondo Beach voters does not discuss the air pollution exemption AES will use to circumvent the air quality restrictions that are supposed to keep Redondo Beach out of a Beijing-style cloud. AES’ own filings with the CEC and the AQMD state that the new power plant they are proposing to build will increase particulate pollution (the most dangerous type) by as much as 15 times the current levels. AES and the Chinese Government are not to be trusted with Redondo Beach’s air.

Vote Yes on Measure A to ensure Redondo Beach has cleaner air and a more beautiful coastline!

Vivian Garcia

Redondo Beach

 

Follow the money

Dear ER:

As the treasurer for Bill Brand’s re-election campaign for City Council in Redondo Beach in District 2, I’m responsible for filing all the required financial statements accurately and on time. Bill has raised $8,754 to date, and with the generosity of the locals he represents, expects to reach his goal of $12,000 by election day, March 5th.

Other than some extended family members, Bill’s donations come from the residents of District 2. He turns away donations from special interests like developers, trash companies, consultants, businesses and Harbor leaseholders. As his treasurer, I cringe but admire at some of the donations he has declined to prevent even a hint of conflict with the residents that elected him.

Not so with his opponent Michael Jackson. He has raised a whopping $17,391 so far, but only $1,550 from District 2 residents. Over 90% of his donations are from outside District 2, like businesses and individuals in Sacramento. Clearly, outside, non-resident interests are funding his campaign.

Only five individuals that actually live in District 2 in Redondo Beach have donated to Michael Jackson’s campaign.

All the candidate records and filings are available for viewing at the City Clerks office.

Linda Moffat

Redondo Beach

Unsustainable

Dear ER:

Police and firefighters are out walking the streets for the candidates they have endorsed. I am certainly grateful for all our first responders do for our community. I understand both are understaffed and I am sure all candidates support increasing their staffing to a safe level. But, I question the ability of a candidate endorsed by these unions to objectively assess the trade offs in negotiating their future compensation and benefits.

As much as I respect our first responders, Redondo Beach cannot afford retirement plans that grant exorbitant retirement pay and health care benefits for the rest of their lives. The outgoing Fire Chief will start out with nearly $240K per year plus healthcare. And he will get yearly retirement pay adjustments. When former City Fire Chief Pat Aust was elected to City Council, he was paid about $164K per year. After nearly four years, while the rest of us are suffering through the biggest recession in decades, his retirement pay rose to $174K per year. And, think about it, we can look forward to paying these benefits for each retiree for decades to come.

This is simply unsustainable. Again, I am certain all candidates prioritize public safety. But I question whether Council candidates Michael Jackson and Kimberly Fine, who have accepted police and fire endorsements, can objectively assess their future benefit negotiations. I will be casting my vote for candidates who are objective and unbiased by union endorsements.

Bill Gibbs

Redondo Beach

Necessary A

Dear ER:

I am a 60+ yr old 3rd generation Redondo citizen. I have reservations regarding Measure A, but have more reservations regarding our city’s ability to negotiate a deal with AES that will benefit the citizens of Redondo.

The last time our city negotiated with AES, we ended up giving AES the right to build nearly 3,000 units. They held many meetings, but instead of listening to the citizens, they gave into the business community and AES

When the Heart of the City was passed, our leaders chose to re-order the list of speakers so that the business interests could be heard first. I signed up 1st, but ended up 67th out of over 100 speakers. The city manager stated that the mayor had the right to re-order the list to give preference to businesses over the citizens. This inappropriate action led to the referendum that caused Heart of the City to be rescinded.

AES has expert negotiators. I respect our city officials, but do not believe any of them are expert commercial real estate negotiators. Measure A will ensure a better negotiating position with AES. It will guarantee the power plant can’t be rebuilt. If further analysis shows AES needs a larger percentage of land for commercial use or the city cannot afford a large park, then we can have another vote to see if it is best to have less park and more commercial.

History has shown that the last time our city negotiated with AES, we ended up with potentially 3,000 units that the citizens overwhelming did not want. Current technology dictates we don’t need to build power plants by the ocean any more. Science tells us the emissions from the proposed plant will be unhealthy.

Measure A is not the best answer, but is a necessary one, given that our city officials have been unable to successfully negotiate a mutually agreeable solution with AES during the past few years.

 

Bill and Susie Lippert

Redondo Beach

Issue with Oil

Dear ER:

Steve Layton, president of E&B Natural Resources, has condescendingly portrayed twelve Hermosa residents who spoke out at a joint Council/School Board meeting January 23rd as those who “remain concerned” of E&B’s plan to drill 35 oil wells in city.

Those residents, and many others, are again having to waste their own valuable time and money to challenge E&B’s insane desire to drill toxic oil wells a stone’s throw from million-dollar homes in tiny Hermosa Beach.

Why wasn’t Layton personally in attendance at the Jan. 23 meeting when an E&B discussion item was posted on the agenda? Is Layton to be hiding behind his full page PR advertisements and only responding under controlled situations rather than participating at public forums, on the record, where people can publicly question E&B’s less than honorable deal as made and signed behind closed doors with Hermosa’s council?

E&B, with the outrageous support of Hermosa’s two carpet-bagger councilmen, Michael DiVirgilio and Kit Bobko, and perhaps a few others behind the woodwork, has slickly now weaseled its way into Hermosa Beach, a 21st-century city touting itself as having goals promoting good health, the environment, being green, and carbon-neutral, to now be ludicrously hawking the drilling of 35 toxic oil wells. Somehow that just doesn’t compute.

E&B’s pitchman, Layton, has now personally moved into Hermosa Beach, obviously to better-control the oil debate to be affecting Hermosa’s 1.3 square miles of beach, ocean, residents, businesses, and home-owners. E&B evidently views Hermosa’s electorate as being stupid and easily conned into returning to the 19th-century’s oil-drilling greed and ugliness.

If Layton actually believes Hermosa residents will be fooled into spiraling backwards basis a fork-lift pallet-full of smoke-and-mirrors documents, glossy PR ads, and elixirs to be dumped at their doorsteps and filling their mailboxes, than perhaps he needs to wake up and smell the coffee as he’s stuck in an oily dream and seems to have not-a-clue that the resistance he’s beginning to see is merely the tip of the iceberg that E&B has carelessly navigated into.

Howard Longacre

Hermosa Beach

Comments:

comments so far. Comments posted to EasyReaderNews.com may be reprinted in the Easy Reader print edition, which is published each Thursday.