King Harbor Blog

There wasn't a lot of new business this month so after approving a small construction project at the Spectrum Club, the Harbor commission got back to talking about zoning.  According to city staff, the goal of the current changes making their way through various city offices and commissions is to bring the various conflicting documents into alignment.

My Harbor Lights column about the flyers circulated by Buildiing a Better Redondo didn’t mention their alarm over the potential for 750,000 square feet of new development within the harbor.

In what could appear to be an attempt by the Panning Department to please everyone, which usually pleases no one, the latest version of the document headed for the city council contains a revised proposal that’s closer to 600,000 square feet.

It was generally believed among people in the room that a cap on square footage was irrelevant. The HC seemed to think that if you’re going to have an irrelevant number, it might as well be a big one.  We proposed that the square footage cap revert to the original staff recommendation of 750,000 sq ft.

You can expect to hear a lot more about this issue.  Here’s the way it looks to me.  It’s been 2 ½ decades since anything’s been built in the marina.  I’d like to see something built there that draws us all to it. Without zoning changes, that isn’t going to happen.  Let’s do something!

Quite often after it rains in this part of the world, the breeze freshens and the sun comes out.  Some people call this the back end of the front.

Friday afternoon about 25 people were invited out to sail the Lynx, a 122 foot clipper schooner built to resemble a ship that fought the war of 1812. It had rained that morning but by the time the Lynx crew had the sails raised, it was blowing a little under 20 knots in full sunshine.

We spent a couple hours sailing between Palos Verdes and Manhattan Beach.  It was one of those times when I understood why an old friend used to say sailing is the second best feeling in the world.

The Linx was one of only a few tall ships to visit King Harbor.  She spent the weekend hosting tours and afternoon sailing trips.  I told Jeffrey Woods, Director of Operations of the Lynx Educational Foundation and son of the man who had the ship built, to tell his father I said the world was a better place with the Linx in it.  I sincerely believe that.

The ship continues sailing up and down the coast.  You can check out the Linx at www.privateerlynx.org.

The RB Harbor Commission met in council chambers at 7 PM and adjourned shortly after 1 AM Tuesday.

We had a full agenda. We got an update on the Harbor Resort Web Site, the Harbor Patrol report and an update on the various items that make up the Strategic Plan.

The things that took us into the wee hours were a budget review and a discussion of the proposed land use amendments for the Harbor/Pier area.

The budget review was presented in a clear, concise spread sheet format that made it much easier to understand.  It pointed out that the surplus cash in the harbor enterprise will be depleted by more than 50% in 5 years. The most optimistic increase of 8% probably won't do much to offset that depletion.

The real time burner was discussion of zoning changes.  It looks like any major development in the harbor/pier area will require changes to the current zoning.  Anything that might spur development is like putting underwear made out of fiberglass insulation on the people in the city who don't want any development, ever. It irritates the hell out of them.

This is going to be a fight to the death and the only way anything is going to change in the harbor is if the people of the city refuse to be bullied by the small, vocal minority who would like to turn the entire city into a park.

On January 31st I attended a meeting with a number of other people who had a variety of interests in and around King Harbor.  The purpose of the meeting was to expose us to preliminary work on a new set of signs that will appear throughout the city.

I say the purpose was to expose us rather than to solicit advice because at the end of the meeting, I had the distinct impression that little or nothing we suggested would be incorporated in the final design and implementation phases of the project.  I hope I'm wrong.

The group was nearly unanimous in its choice of a design that was apparently displayed only as a contrast to the design that seemed like it was selected and approved before our "opinions" were solicited.  It's also unclear to what extent this will cause a dilemma for city staff. I'm hoping their energy will go into implementing the ideas we offered rather than coming up with an excuse to do what they were going to do anyway.  We shall see.

At any rate, there should be some new signs to direct people to the pier and harbor, as well as Riviera Village. The projected completion date is supposed to be this summer.  That seems a little over ambition for a city project but maybe I'll be wrong about that too.

My 12/31/08 article in Easy Reader entitled, Fun with Harbor Funds explains how the state requires the city to account for all its revenues and expenses within the harbor enterprise.  While I was researching the article, someone with business interestes in the harbor suggested to me that the city was working its way toward a deficit, with no relief in sight.

Current projections provided by the City Manager show a revenue shortfall of about $500,000.  With current estimated cash reserves of $13,000,000, the city could withstand this deficit spending at its current level for quite a few years.

Unfortunately, there are 21 capital improvement projects at various stages of preparation or completion that could wipe out quite a bit of that money before they're finished.

My source told me that the newly discovered budget deficit in the harbor enterprise was due to accounting.  He believes the city has begun more accurately charging off goods and services it once absorbed in the general fund.  For example, something like the time public works employees spend on harbor related project was not charged to the harbor enterprise in the past.  Now it shows up as an expense.

He feels that with a more accurate means of tabulating the actual cost of operating the harbor, the surplusses that created the $13 million in cash will turn to deficits. 

I offer no opinion one way or another because I don't have enough data to form a solid opinion. If he's right, the harbor enterprise will need to find new ways to sustain itself and fund improvements in the near future.  If it does not, the citizens of Redondo Beach will need to be told that some of the money that traditionally went to other purposes, will now need to go to the harbor, which always supported itself. It may not be the biggest problem the city faces, but it would certainly change how we view the harbor in terms of the ovarall city budget. 

All 7 members of the commission attended the January meeting of the Redondo Beach Harbor Commission.

After dispensing with the normal, procedural matters, we had a presentation by the City Manager. He covered capital improvement projects, harbor funds, a design project that's currently underway and the 08-09 fiscal year budget.

We were presented with a list of 18 projects that have been approved and funded including raising a seawall, replacing an elevator, Harbor Patrol dock and building replacement and pier parking sewer repairs.

All of these projects fall under the heading of normal maintenance and repair. None of them is likely to seriously alter the experience most of us have in the harbor, but they ensure all the basic services continue to function. When you look at the list it becomes obvious it takes a lot of behind-the-scenes work to keep the harbor running.

I'm probably going to write a Harbor Lights article about the Harbor Fund budget. It's pretty complicated. It looks like in 07-08 there was just over $9,000,000 in harbor revenue and almost $10,000,000 in expenses resulting in approximately $400,000 of deficit spending.

A design project has been approved by the Harbor Commission and the City Council. When it's complete, the harbor and pier will have a number of consistant design elements that might be considered similar to a New England fishing village. T

he City Attorney presented a slide program about the Brown Act, a law that requires business conducted by elected and appointed officials to be carried out in public.

Kosmont Associates prepared a report for the council on 5 real estate parcels in the harbor that are currently controlled by the city. It's hard to generalize about the report's recommendations other than to say they think restaurants will be the most advantageous use of city-controlled property.

Minutes of the meeting will be posted on the city's web site when they have been prepared http://www.redondo.org/depts/Boards_n_Commissions/harbor/minutes.asp

I read that Building a Better Redondo has submitted its signatures to the Mayor with the intention of getting their initiative on the ballot for a city-wide vote. Asking citizens if they believe they should have the right to vote on all important developments in their city is like asking whether they believe kids should be protected. Who's going to say no? I am.

I love our way of government but I can't stand unnecessary laws and regulations. To say we need to change the way development is implemented in Redondo Beach is to say the way we do it now doesn't work. Where's the proof? Show me the disasterous development that has scarred this community! What's that I hear? Silence.

The reason you can't point to some atrocious develpment that never should have been built (other than the power plant) is that the process we now follow prevents that from happening. Anyone who thinks this City Council rushes off and makes snap, radical decisions regarding development hasn't been paying attention.

Take the Seaside Lagoon as an example. There was talk of closing the lagoon last year due to environmental regulation violations. In fact, the Harbor Commission voted to close it for the season. The lagoon remained open and operating as it has for 30+ years.

Subsequently, there were at least 3 public planning sessions devoted to long term plans for the lagoon. Unless I missed something in the last two weeks, there's still no plan on the table for the lagoon. Is this a City Council that makes hasty decisions to the detriment of the community? I don't think so.

We vote by district to have one of our fellow citizens represent us on the council. That person is supposed to use his or her knowledge and talents along with input from us to make the best possible decisions for the community. The notion that a bunch of biased, organized, motivated voters approving or rejecting a development project, somehow represents the interests of the community better than our elected officials, is simply wrong.

If these elected officials are incompetent or corrupt, we should take appropriate action. If not, we should let them do what we elected them to do. What's next, a ballot item for every public works project? Yes or no, should the sewer lines that run under Aviation Boulevard be 10 feet in diameter or 12 feet in diameter?

We have a process for dealing with the city's business. Before you suggest adding another level of complexity, bureaucracy and expense to the process, I'd like to see evidence of how the process is broken. How will this initiative make the end result better, not just sound more appealing? I've seen nothing other than the opinions of a few zealous individuals to support this movement, although my mind remains open.