Serial offender
Dear ER:
Looking at this guy’s picture I’m convinced this isn’t his first rodeo (“Resident fined hundreds for jogging,” ER Sept. 23, 2010).
He has the looks of a serial jogging offender and I wouldn’t be surprised if he strikes again soon. He is doing all the things a typical offender does. For example, he has returned to the scene of the crime with his running outfit on!
I fear the $600 fine will not deter this seratonin addict’s compulsion to exercise and we will be seeing him running in an orange jumpsuit and leg irons before the end of the year.
Sneead
Web comment
Obey the law
Dear ER:
I’ve been involved in the effort to reopen the dune at Sand Dune Park for nearly a year, so this story certainly caught my attention. I’m not really sure the “no jogging” rule is necessary, but given that it’s in place, I would encourage everyone to follow the posted rules in the park.
Undoubtedly, $600 is an excessive fine– I’m not sure why fines for rollerblading and jogging are so high, especially compared to truly dangerous actions like excessive speeding or running red lights.
CORE will keep watching issues surrounding the dune.
Jake Rome
Web comment
Show-off!
Dear ER:
I personally think Kevin should have been publically flogged and put in solitary for being such a show-off! Jogging up those steps? Are you kidding me? I was in Manhattan Beach recently and it took me about an hour and a half just to walk the steps, and that was coming down!
A $600 fine for jogging? You can’t make this stuff up! Are skateboarders given the electric chair? Only in California.
‘MKC’
Web comment
Control growth
Dear ER:
There are two “Vote Yes on G” signs in my Redondo Beach yard. Why? Because I believe we must have sensible and controlled growth and development in our harbor and pier area or live with further declines in quality of life in our area.
It is easy to see that keeping things as they are actually lets the area decay while businesses waste away (which also means city revenues situations become worse).
I hope for a united city that builds strong ties binding safety, education, beauty and services together. I dream of a harbor and pier area that is the hubbub of family and visitor activities that spreads to the north, south and east boundaries of Redondo Beach and beyond.
We can become a city we are all proud of. We can again be a city that carries our weight through taxes and partnerships – not an under-producing waterfront that locals hardly ever visit or share with guests.
Controlled growth means adding charm and growing a place we can all be proud of and utilize on a regular basis because it is enjoyable, safe and thriving. We aren’t talking San Francisco or Seattle’s Fisherman’s Wharf areas. What we are talking about is a partnership with ourselves for the things that will bring back a healthy and active beach community.
This is why I am casting a Yes of G vote and hope those who agree with me will make sure to vote on Election Day.
Barbara ramsey-Duke
Redondo Beach
Attorney logic
Dear ER:
Redondo Beach City Attorney Mike Webb acknowledges that the city has the legal authority to phase out the operation of the power plant in King Harbor. But he cautions that such action might result in very expensive litigation against the city by the plant’s owner, AES.
However, Webb expressed no concern for the cost of litigation when he advised the City Council a year ago that it could bypass the provisions of the City Charter, and the will of the people, by skipping the required public vote on proposed new zoning ordinances in the harbor area. As a result, local citizens had to sue the city to secure their right to vote on the zoning. The citizens won, but along the way, Webb hired two very expensive outside law firms to defend the city’s illegal attempt to deprive the voters of their rights.
Thanks to the citizen lawsuit, Redondo Beach will vote this November on Measure G, the new zoning proposed by the Council. This proposal allows an additional 400,000 square feet of development west of Harbor Drive in King Harbor and time-shares up to three stories high. This is plainly excessive, and the city’s own traffic studies confirm that any such development will result in over 30,000 new car trips per day and highway gridlock in the area. Do we want that for our waterfront and surrounding neighborhoods?
Vote NO on Measure G and insist that the city come forward with sensible zoning for the harbor.
David Wiggins
Redondo Beach
No publicity stunt
Dear ER:
I have never written an editorial before, but after reading the very misleading and one-sided article about the Power Plant [“Brand leads protest against power plant,” ER, Sept. 16, 2010], I felt compelled to write this response. For Councilman Aspel to call the rally a “publicity stunt” is quite insulting to the residents participating in the rally and the hundreds of residents who supported the effort through honking and verbal affirmations. I attended the rally along with my two children, ages 10 and 12. We were there to inform other residents that we have an opportunity to do something as a city against the rebuilding of the power plant. The City Council has not acted on this opportunity and has kept the residents uninformed and uneducated that the City has an opportunity to end the industrialized zoning of the power plant land.
My children and my participation in the rally was hardly for publicity. My children do not even know what a “publicity stunt” is, but they do know that the power plant is ugly, dirty, loud (when it does actually operate) and blocks their view of the ocean. I am a long time Redondo Beach resident and homeowner who doesn’t understand why a power plant that is inefficient and rarely operates, which clearly indicates unneeded and unessential power generation, must stay in a beautiful and residential waterfront area like Redondo Beach. It just doesn’t make sense from an economic, environmental and life value standpoint for the Redondo Beach residents and homeowners.
Dawn Esser
Redondo Beach
Good for Redondo
Dear ER:
We are writing today to ask for your help. On November 2, 2010, Redondo Beach residents will vote to consider approving the City’s Local Coastal Plan for the harbor area. The city is required by California State Law to have a Local Coastal Plan for our waterfront.
Measure G is about a Redondo Beach coastal zoning ordinance that was developed by our city through public meetings involving residents, citizen groups and community leaders over a 10 year span with thousands of hours of public input through workshops and hearings.
We ask that we come together as a community and protect the future of our harbor area by voting Yes on Measure G, which supports the following: Parks, open space and recreational facilities as allowable uses of the AES Power Plant site; No new residential development allowed on the power plant site or west of North Harbor Drive; Limits on the size of development in the harbor.
Additionally, the Local Coastal Plan will give Redondo Beach local permitting authority subject to all provisions of our City Charter and result in more effective planning for our Harbor; while still maintaining the public’s right to make appeals to the California Coastal Commission.
Redondo Beach United needs your help to preserve and protect the future of our seaside and our quality of life. Please offer your support by volunteering to the campaign or by making a contribution in support of our efforts. For more information please visit our website at www.RedondoBeachUnited.com or contact us at:
Redondo Beach United, P.O. Box 712, Redondo Beach, CA 90277. Email: info@RedondoBeachUnited.com. (310) 245-8115.
Mike Gin
Mayor, Redondo Beach
Redondo Beach United
Chris Cagle
Former City Council Member, District 2
Redondo Beach United
Fact checking
Dear ER:
Some just plain wrong information has been printed in this paper about Measure G, serving to confuse, or even mislead, Redondo Beach voters.
I’m specifically referring to repeated claims that Measure G will somehow “rid our city of the AES power plant.” The official analysis of the Measure G amendment clearly shows that this is not the case: “…the AES Generating Plant, however, would remain as a permissible use with or without the [Measure G] amendments …”
What’s more, those who are trying to “tear down the plant” to replace it with a park will be shocked to learn that only by passing Measure G would any of the existing AES land be zoned for parks or recreation. Again, from the official analysis: “The new Generating Plant designation would also allow parks and open space as permitted future uses of the property.”
I know everyone is busy, but the only way to know for sure what you are voting for is to read it. You can do so for yourself at: www.redondo.org.
Steve Goldstein, Chair
Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce
Building a Better City – Yes on Measure G
‘No’ not the answer
Dear ER:
As a Redondo Beach resident who wants a vibrant community that encourages investment in our harbor and pier areas, I believe we desperately need Measure G to pass on Nov. 2. While our neighboring beach cities in Manhattan and Hermosa take steps to improve their downtown areas adjacent to their waterfronts, opponents of Measure G continue to oppose much needed infrastructure improvements in our own harbor/pier areas that have left us behind. Measure G would create much needed building limits to keep density down, traffic at acceptable levels, and most important, zoning that will give investors the predictability and certainty that must exist if we are ever going to improve our own waterfront.
Measure G will finally give residents the opportunity to move the city forward in a very cautious and constructive manner. Continuing to “just say no” is not the answer I will accept since it prevents taking the steps needed to turn our harbor and pier areas into the world-class improvements they have the potential of becoming. “Just saying no” prohibits us from moving ahead as we need to.
The clear action on November 2 is saying “Yes” on Measure G to avoid costly lawsuits, control growth, and save money.
Michael Jackson
Redondo Beach Harbor Commissioner
