Redondo Beach council redistricting shifts voters
What was expected to be a routine redistricting vote erupted into a turf skirmish at last week’s City Council meeting when North Redondo Beach Councilman Steve Diels proposed shifting the AES power plant from Councilman Bill Brand’s South Redondo District 2 to neighboring Councilman Pat Aust’s District 3. The proposal reflected a growing tension between North and South Redondo.
Redistricting was required after the results of the 2010 census showed population growth that had left the five council districts unbalanced. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, Redondo Beach grew from a population of 63,261 in 2000 to 66,748 in 2010, a growth of about 5 percent totaling 3,457 new residents.
Most of the growth occurred in the north of the city, with northernmost districts 4 and 5 adding 1,387 and 570 residents, respectively. North-central Redondo’s District 3 added 754 people. City staff developed a target of 13,349 people to equally balance each district; District 4 had ballooned to 14,101.
As a result, the staff’s proposed redistricting shifted four blocks from District 4 to District 3, two blocks from District 3 to District 2, and five blocks from District 2 to District 1. District 5 remained the same.
None of the councilmen had any objections to the redistricting. Three of them – Councilman Steve Aspel of District 1, Pat Aust of District 3, and Steve Diels of District 4 – are termed out at the end of their current terms. And Councilman Matt Kilroy’s District 5 was unaffected, meaning only first-term Councilman Bill Brand of District 2 had an electorate that would be impacted.
But Diels threw a loop into discussions when he suggested adding another change: removing the controversial AES Power Plant from Brand’s district and putting it into Aust’s district. The change would not shift any population but instead add commercial/industrial uses to a district that has little such zoning. Diels argued that North Redondo was bearing the brunt of growth while simultaneously losing voters – and thus influence – through the redistricting. He suggested the addition of AES to District 3 would help address this.
“The idea is to balance Redondo Beach, so we move some of the waterfront into a more central area,” Diels said. “And it’s rational, it’s logical, and I think it’s good for the city.”
Brand vehemently disagreed. He described the proposal as gerrymandering “for no apparent reason.” Brand has been a very vocal critic of AES. He founded the South Bay Parkland Conservancy with the idea of building a park on the AES site and has been involved in the citizens group Building A Better Redondo’s efforts to prevent AES from repowering by rezoning the site to disallow power generation.
“It is my residents who are affected most by that site….It’s definitely a part of my district, and it belongs in my district,” Brand said.
Aust was receptive to the change. He said his residents are likewise affected by AES.
“I’ve lived in the draft of that power plant of 60 years,” Aust said. “I’ve been impacted all my life.”
Opposition came from a surprising source. Councilman Steve Aspel, who has been an outspoken critic of Brand’s, rose to his defense. He called the proposal “idiotic” and suggested it was gerrymandering.
“This smacks of the same things we are criticizing state and federal government of doing, gerrymandering those lines,” Aspel said. “…If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck….”
The council voted 3-2 to support staff’s proposed redistricting without Diels proposed amendment.
But Diels this week vowed to revisit the matter on second reading at this Tuesday’s council meeting. He said the more he has thought about it, the more it makes sense to him. He argued that the waterfront is so large and complex that it makes sense to divide it between two councilmen. And he said that the move would shift some influence north in the city.
“Again, South Redondo is getting votes and influence,” Diels said. “What is North Redondo getting? Nothing. We are actually giving something up. So to get something in return, we should get some of the city’s resources.”
Brand suggested that Diels is biased because he has accepted $3,000 in campaign contributions from AES and his district benefited from a $15,000 contribution from AES to help build a park in North Redondo.
“Councilmember Diels is more interested in politicking a critical issue for the entire South Bay than doing what is best for the community,” Brand said. “…If I were him I would recues myself from any future votes regarding their facility, and surely wouldn’t be trying to gerrymander it out of the District of the councilmember who opposes their new plant.”
Aspel said he is willing to reconsider his vote. He said that Brand’s obsession with the power plant has resulted in him ignoring other critical issues in the district, such as the parking problems at the Redondo Beach pier. Aspel also said he didn’t like the way BBR was “politicking” the redistricting issue in blog posts.
“I have an open mind,” Aspel said. “If [Diels] pulls it, I will reconsider it…I might have gotten a little sarcastic up there on the dais. In my mind has nothing to do with Bill Brand or Steve Diels or anybody – I didn’t place my vote on people currently in office. I just accepted staff’s recommendation because I think it’s a fair and equal recommendation.”
Diels said that the issue lays bare a disconnect between North and South Redondo.
“There is a north-south issue because the census proves most of the heavy lifting has gone on in North Redondo and most of the avoidance is done in South Redondo,” he said. “So why would we give up votes and influence when we are doing the heavy lifting? There is a north versus south issue because the north is making the biggest contributions.”
Brand said that he hopes the biggest issue – blocking AES’s attempts to rebuild its plant – is not obscured by the political conflict.
“I hope the public will not get distracted by petty politics and strongly oppose AES’s plan to demolish and rebuild their plant,” he said. ER