Re: Redondo Beach’s controversial “Waterfront” redevelopment remains in limbo (June 1-14 issue)
Harbor uses should remain the priority
Emdee and Bruning accusing residents of playing the race card is purely revisionist fiction. Early in the process, Bruning was quoted in a local paper saying the area needed revitalization because there are “scary people down there.” The most avid supporters of CenterCal posted about people with “ghetto blasters” at Seaside Lagoon; Mexicans camping on the pier, and people “not reflective of Redondo demographics.”
Bruning took what a few people said about a theater at the waterfront and ignored the overwhelming majority who spoke in opposition. The fact of the matter is Bruning was the first to talk about a theater as part of the development.
And Emdee is copping out. The people want broad harbor revitalization. But they want one that is not so impactful on long standing recreational uses of the harbor as an actual harbor.
We have many, many alternatives to shop, dine and see movies, but in the 25 miles of coastline between MDR and the Port of Los Angeles there is only one harbor. Harbor uses should remain the priority of the harbor. And we can revitalize without supersizing.
The unwanted “Mall by the Sea”
Did you ever read the pro-CenterCal Facebook page moderated by Tony Trutanich, Jr. and Chris Voisey? It is full of race-baiting and fear of “the other” with many, many instances of derogatory rhetoric directed at non-Redondo residents. This article makes no mention of that, and instead swallows the CenterCal-approved B.S. claiming the racism is actually coming from…we, the residents??? CenterCal, you miserable scumbags: Get the hell out of our city and bring your fired ex-VP and chief propagandist Ms. Marraffino and your unwanted Mall by the Sea with you. You are not worthy of our time.
Re: Pres. Trump signals okay for year-round sales of E15 (June 1-14 issue)
More expensive, lower mileage
So why we are still burdened with ethanol? More expensive, lower mileage. Paying off the farmers at the expense of the consumer who pays higher gas prices, higher food costs and less performance and mileage is not I expected from Trump.
Re: Sneakaboards: Too Much Government Regulation? (May 18-31 issue)
Are liveaboards effecting the environment?
The big complaint I remember hearing about too many live aboard was the effect on the environment. While this may have been true when people were dumping their sewage overboard that is not the case now.
I do not think the people that live on their boats want to see our harbors decline anymore than anyone else. If anything they would be even more concerned about the ocean environment. The exception may be those that live on moorings away from a dock. It’s harder for them to avail themselves to dockside facilities such as restrooms, trash receptacles or showers.
Liveaboards infringing on homeowners
Consideration to where some ‘liveaboards’ try to live on their own boats is necessary in this discussion. Some mooring spots are right in front of homeowners’ homes. A homeowner does not want to be seeing the ‘liveaboards’ on their boats right out in front living and caring on their life. Often … not always some of these people pee in the bay, throw trash in the bay, and lead a noisy life style with little regard to the home owners whose front yards they are living in. This is one other aspect of LIVE ABOARDS that happen around So. Calif.
No fairness in sneaking aboard
The term “sneakaboard” is a totally valid term to indicate individuals that live on a vessel outside the compliance of the marina’s rules and policies. I’ve been on waiting lists for the privilege of living on my boat, and paid liveaboard fees once permission was granted. Where is the fairness to individuals like myself when others break the rules and “sneak” aboard. Marinas should do a better job of policing the situation or just abolish the limitations and let everyone live on their boats if they want. Rules and policies are a waste if they are not enforced.
No smoking policy on the docks?
I totally agree with Parimal Rohit. I have had boats in several local marinas and have always appreciated having some liveaboards in close proximity to help with security. As long as they don’t annoy others or start hanging out laundry or leave extraneous items on the dock, they are more than welcome in my book. One thing I would request though: A no-smoking policy on the docks and in their boats. This is a serious problem for the other tenants which can be easily overcome by a simple rule, easily enforced.