 |
|||||
|
Letters
AES clears air
Dear ER:
I have read numerous articles making reference to the AES Redondo Generating Station over the past few years and have chosen not to comment on the occasional factual errors or misquotes. Your cover article in the October 25 edition however, sets a new standard for inaccuracy, misrepresentation and overall sloppy reporting.
It’s bad enough that the writer doesn’t know how high our stacks are, the difference between a gigawatt and a megawatt, the location of our headquarters or that it was our Chairman who grew up in the area, not our CEO.
It’s bad enough that the writer doesn’t know NOx is a colorless gas, not the "black, sticky gunk" that carried over from the stacks when Edison burned oil years ago, and that he failed to mention CompuNOx is an interim process while AES Redondo installs equipment that will reduce NOx emissions to one-tenth of previous levels, eliminating hundreds of tons of air pollution each year.
It’s bad enough that the writer shows little grasp of why the recent energy crisis occurred and fails to mention that AES Redondo earns its money by being reliable and doesn’t make a cent if the price of power goes up or down.
It’s bad enough that you have tried to splice together several different stories (Heart of the City, NOx emissions, Energy crisis, AES) and ended up with a piece that does not cover any of them adequately or accurately.
It’s bad enough that you have Bob Benz’ mug on the cover of your newspaper.
What I cannot accept is how the writer misrepresented my company. AES’ mission is to serve the world by providing safe, clean, reliable energy at an affordable price. We believe profits are only the by-product of accomplishing that mission well, balancing the interests of all our stakeholders.
At AES Redondo we have been proactive and work diligently to be a good neighbor and serve our community. I will proudly stand by our accomplishments over the past three years.
We have an open door at AES Redondo and have made ourselves available to discuss issues in any forum. All we ask in return is basic fairness.
C.J. Thompson, General Manager
AES Redondo Beach
Editor’s response: Easy Reader apologizes for the factual errors in the article, and appreciates manager Thompson’s clarifications.
The why of Y
Dear ER:
A YES vote on Manhattan Beach Measure Y will provide our police, firefighters and paramedics with timely replacement of their woefully inadequate facilities.
The usual village nay sayers will have you believe that remodeling, rather than replacement, is in order. They don't want you to know that two separate, independent teams of building professionals advise that remodeling makes no sense, financially or functionally. Just tour the facilities -- it's clear that minor repairs and a few more rooms won't do the trick.
These same naysayers will have you believe that our city has plenty of money it just doesn't know what to do with. They don't want you to know that the vast majority of the city's funds are restricted for critical and necessary city operations, either legally or by prudent fiscal policy. There is only $2.5 million available for discretionary use, which doesn't get us close to the $15 million needed.
These same naysayers have a history of saying ‘black' whenever the city says ’white,' regardless of the issue. They don't want you to know that the phantom organization created to oppose Measure Y gives the appearance of a group, but is really just the same sad and disgruntled loners.
Passage of Measure Y requires a two-thirds majority of those who vote, so your ’YES' vote is critical to the continued safety of this community.
Keep ’Em Strong -- Vote YES on Measure Y.
Gerry O'Connor, Chairman
Residents for Public Safety (A Committee in Support of Measure Y), Manhattan
Beach
Manhattan Beach no Manhattan Blues
Dear ER:
Last week I took a tour of the MBPD building given by Chief Klevisol himself. I saw one discolored ceiling tile and peeled-back wall covering in the lobby -- otherwise, no extensive water damage. Although the building is constructed entirely of concrete block, the chief did point out some termite damage in one window frame. There are separate locker facilities/restrooms for male and female personnel. I think they each have only one shower, though. There is a small workout room with a couple of stationary bicycles, some free weights and a Nautilus machine -- would probably accommodate four people at a time, and a four target pistol range.
The detectives are located in a double-wide trailer adjacent to the main building. It is air conditioned and seemed quite comfortable (more so than the ones we had when I worked at TRW). I saw a main power panel and several sub-panels. Although I couldn’t see the size of the main breaker, it looked like it could take the loads of the computers and other equipment I counted (no mention was made of nuisance trips.) Communications cable is strung through the overhead like in most office buildings -- no problem there.
I was expecting to see something like the offices in "NYPD Blue" or "Hill Street Blues." It’s a bit crowded, but grungy they are not. Although there are 130 personnel, less than 100 sworn, the officers operate on a 10/40 work schedule in several shifts and spend most of the time out on patrol. Only about seven personnel are present for shift change briefings, not the entire watch. I think I remember the chief saying that patrol officers will soon be able to compose reports on the computers in their mobile units for uploading to the main data base, so they won’t have to use the office machines.
I couldn’t see the jail as it was occupied, but the tiny holding room for juveniles was downright claustrophobic.
I didn’t get to see the fire department facilities due to time constraints, but a large area I did see was taken up by a lot of (maybe 50) confiscated leaf blowers.
Bottom line: The MBPD facility appeared a bit crowded but adequate to me. It is worth a $37 million replacement versus repair and modification? Probably not. Is it cost effective to float a $17 million bond? I don’t think so. Consider that the city is paying $500k a year rent to the BCHD, a couple of thousand per game for the former TRW parking lot. Consider that the city spent more than half a million to remodel the old Manhattan Heights Library building for "arts and crafts," when that land could have fetched at least $2 million as a site for multiple unit apartments, which would have improved the tax base. Past councils prided themselves on "pay as you go" financing. Why not this one?
As citizens we all have to make economic choices. I have some termites in my old 1952 house, and although the roof doesn’t leak (yet), it’s going to have to be replaced soon. Can I float a bond? Hmmm.
Phil Reimbert
Manhattan Beach
Creightanized
Dear ER:
I want to take this opportunity to thank "Creighton" for the significant boost in support that my candidacy for the Hermosa Beach School Board received following his advertising insert in the Oct. 18, 2001 Easy Reader. Receiving his "endorsement" obviously means that I am saying and doing the right things about maintaining and improving the quality of the educational program in our schools to the benefit of parents, teachers and of course our students.
Lance Widman
Hermosa Beach
American beach
Dear ER:
When the proponents of Hermosa Measure F were gathering signatures to place the measure on the ballot the Daily Breeze wrote an article detailing what the paper called a "spying" campaign being conducted by the Hermosa chamber.
The chamber’s previous executive director bragged of how she had broken in to the private financial documents of Measure F’s proponent and obtained confidential banking records, how she had an ex-FBI agent investigating for "dirt," and how she was sending out "truth squads" to keep people from signing the petition.
The chambers executive director then sent out 11, 000 hot pink fliers to residents calling the proponents "dissidents" and asking businesses to refuse to let the petitioners gather signatures in front of their stores.
Within a couple of months the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce Executive Director resigned.
This kind of behavior should be considered the next time you hear from the chamber of commerce and the current city council (Councilperson Kathy Dunbabin not included).
The supporters of YES on F have no motive other than to put the interests of the many ahead of the bank accounts of a few. Measure F will limit the commercialization of our beach, end the parking nightmare from commercial events and forever prohibit paid admission on the beach.
Our beach is America, our beach must be free!
Donley Falkenstien
Hermosans for Balanced Coastal Use
Measure F chapter and worse
Dear ER:
The proponents of Measure F have spent a lot of time denying the negative effects of this ridiculous ballot initiative. To put it delicately, they have a casual relationship with the truth. It is time they were put to rest.
First, this was marketed as a Coastal Conservation Initiative. It attracted the signatures of over 2,000 well-intentioned citizens who, I believe, were lead to think it was an environmental document. Reading the six pages of fine print, you discover that very little that deals with beach or ocean cleanliness. It is almost entirely directed at special events held in the city.
Proponents claim it would not affect the many small, community-oriented events in the Coastal Zone, stretching from the high tide line all the way to Ardmore Ave. Reading the document, you discover that any temporary event with more than 500 participants and attendees or an event that displaces more than 20 public parking spaces would be required to get a Coastal Commission Permit (page 3, Section 15, A & B). This does include the Farmer’s Market, the St. Patrick’s Day Festival, Aloha Days, the Valley School Halloween Carnival, the Women’s Club Pancake Breakfast, the Sunset Concerts on the Beach series, the Fire Fighter’s Pancake Breakfast, the Project Touch Car Show, The Spring Eggstravaganza, and the Sand and Strand Run.
It requires that the organizations sponsoring these events meet all Coastal C.E.Q.A. guidelines (Section 17). This would require them to submit virtually a full E.I.R. for a small community event.
Hermosa has always been proud of the fact that we own our own beach, but now these state appointed bureaucrats would be given control. They are accountable to no one, especially not local citizens. They hold their monthly meetings in different locations far away from Hermosa Beach.
Measure F would also require the city break its contract with the County that provides beach cleaning and lifeguard services (Section 2, H). The taxpayers of Hermosa would have to pay extra to maintain these services. If we can not afford them, those services would have to be reduced or eliminated.
These are only a few of the problems this badly written, poorly thought out proposal would cause. Please, you vote, read the initiative, published, in its entirety at www.no-on-f.org. You decide who is telling the truth.
John Bowler, Mayor
Hermosa Beach
Measure Edgerton
Dear ER:
Hermosa Beach voters will be voting on Measure G -- a two term limit for councilmembers. We need term limits because of the power of incumbency and the fact most candidates elected to the city council receive a minority of the vote because we have multiple choices for city council. In essence, one can be elected to the city council being everyone's second or third choice. Term limits is a way to mitigate our current election system in Hermosa Beach. Also, term limits make it easier to elect new people to the council.
Measure G allows a term limited councilmember to run as a write-in candidate. If a councilmember believes he/she is worthy of serving a third term, then that person has the option to run as a write-in. And if the councilmember is popular then that person will be re-elected through the write-in process.
Our current city council already has one member who is serving his third term: Sam Edgerton. If you want to make sure that Edgerton can only seek re-election as a write-in, then please Vote Yes on G.
Fred Huebscher
Hermosa Beach
Prizing inexperience
Dear ER:
Proponents of Hermosa Measure G (term limits) incumbent council members as "career" politicians who become representatives of the bureaucracy instead of people whom they were elected to serve. There is not much of a bureaucracy in Hermosa and serving on the council is a part-time position not a career.
They also accuse the council of approving the displacement of local community serving businesses with bars. The small businesses that disappeared from Hermosa were victims of the public’s preference for shopping malls and chain stores. Either-Or Bookstore could not compete with Barnes & Noble or Bookstar. I hate the proliferation of bars in the Hermosa Plaza as much as anybody but term limits won’t get rid of them. Manhattan Beach has term limits but it also has numerous bars. And they claim that "incumbents cannot be effectively challenged because of election laws and abusive practices which give incumbents an unfair advantage." What election laws and abusive practices are they referring to?
Term limits (an idea whose time has come and gone) don’t "create more open and fair elections." They limit voter’s choices by preventing competent and experienced incumbents from seeking re-election. In no other human endeavor is inexperience prized over experience. Hermosa voters don’t need term limits. They are intelligent enough to vote rascals out.
We have the right to vote for incumbents or challengers. We should not deprive voters in future elections of that same right. Please vote NO on G.
Victor Silva
Hermosa Beach
Why a contrarian
Dear ER:
Again this is like challenging motherhood and apple pie, but I am voting NO on Proposition Y in Manhattan Beach. I have a number of reasons for my decision; any one by itself would be enough for me to vote accordingly.
First of all, I am for a new, or renovated police, and fire facility. I toured the facility, and believe the present one can be renovated and expanded as needed for less than a new complex. Be that as it may, the $15 million the city says it needs can be obtained from other sources rather than through the taxpayer.
According to whom you ask, there is a $40-million to $60-million reserve, which is earmarked for other purposes. When asked the city says it is legal to take monies from this reserve, but apparently the city council is reluctant to do this. In any event the city could borrow from this reserve and pay it back at a cheaper rate than through a bond.
Why burden the taxpayer? The money the taxpayer saves can be used to help the economy and the city could gain by the additional sales tax it generated.
I am also concerned about the 35 million-dollar price tag. Much of this is to construct underground parking. The city certainly can build surface parking at a much lower cost. To do this, the city could acquire more footage from the Metlox property. Also by providing public parking, they can obtain more revenue.
Robert Lay
Manhattan Beach
Y of course
Dear ER:
I recently had an opportunity to visit the Manhattan Beach Police Department on business. I was appalled by the inefficient physical layout and the rundown, deteriorating condition of the interior facilities.
I was very pleased and impressed with all the police personnel that I met. They are intelligent, articulate, patient and professional. I found every person I met to be not only dedicated, but also motivated to do their very best.
If we, as a community, expect and demand to acquire and retain top professionals, as the people that I met at the MBPD, then we must provide the facilities and tools for them to do their best job.
I encourage us all to vote on Nov. 6 and to vote for Measure ‘Y.’ I believe that the passage of Measure ‘Y’ will provide the minimum facilities and tools for the professionals who protect and serve us.
If you have any doubts, simply visit the facility and ask yourself if you could work there in the building and with the tools currently provided by us.
Roy A. Judd
Hermosa Beach