In the conflagration that the CenterCal waterfront development project is to the City of Redondo Beach, one area of relative calm seemed to be in the offing…a determination by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as to its coastal worthiness.
For opponents of the project, the CCC may have been considered a firewall against the large scale development that it represents. To supporters, that organization would be a hurdle, but not an insurmountable one since the project as proposed seems to tick off all the boxes required for an approval, even if it required a held nose while voting by the Commission panel members.
But last month, the CCC dramatically changed the thinking about what it might or might not do when the CenterCal project comes before them. That’s because, by a 7-5 vote, the CCC voted to remove its Executive Director Charles Lester, doing so in direct opposition from the environmental movement forces who spent hours speaking to the Commission at their meeting in Morro Bay in his support.
Much of the speculation of why Lester was removed was that the pro-development forces who lobby the CCC constantly, even during their meetings, had become frustrated by the seeming anti-development direction they claim often comes out of the Commission staff. Without Lester and with a more pro-development executive director in his place, the development forces could have their way with the coastline. It would provide them the business opportunities they have sought for years as the CCC continually rejected their proposals.
The charter of the CCC is set in The California Coastal Act, which was voted on in an initiative in 1972. Uncontrolled development in Redondo Beach was used by supporters of the initiative as evidence that these controls were needed. (“Don’t Condo like Redondo!”) Now, those who oppose uncontrolled development fear that the “bad old days” could return and Redondo Beach may be one of those early “beneficiaries.”
The CenterCal project will now enter a new phase as opponents begin to understand that their expected firewall perhaps has been breached. The next line of defense will likely be a voter initiative, which could require planning for the entire waterfront area, including the AES power plant property, as a single development.
The timeline for this would need to be quick, since the process for approval moves forward. This includes the approval of an enormous cost overrun on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. Now, the City has even more “skin in the game” as an impetus to get to a result.
We could expect such an initiative on the 2017 municipal ballot, or, if they are quick enough, on the November, 2016 General Election ballot. While previous initiatives have been successful, the opposition to this one may be more intense since both CenterCal and AES would have financial reasons to see it fail.
Along with elections for Mayor, one termed out Councilman (Bill Brand) and two others seeking re-election in 2017, it is going to be a busy year coming up.
