Unable to attend the first two scoping meetings, and despite the knowledge that no "new shit has come to light", I managed to attend the final
Bridge to Breakwater scoping meeting. Here is my breakdown meeting highlights and perspectives.
The first item I noticed at the meeting were the same 50-60 local players that seem to constitute the entirety of the San Pedro meeting scene. The second thing obvious was the astounding whiteness of the room. The few faces of colour act as a solid reminder that much of San Pedro's population is underinformed about the project.
Like all other Bridge to Breakwater meetings this meeting began with a lenghty outline of the speaking rules. A dry
Army Corps of Engineers intro and a review of the proposed developments. The only details of import were the ease with which EEK/Gafcon's Ron Takaki discussed the details of the Reduced Development Alternative, contered by Hilary Bertsch's almost panicked and hurried, half-assed presentation of the Maximum Development Alternative. She was practically ducking imaginary tomatoes in her rush to finish. I couldn't help wonder if they drew straws to determine who had to fake sell that red herring.
So on came the parade of public comments. Most commenters came to either endorse or condemn the project, it was worth noting that the purpose of the scoping meetings was to gather perspectives relative to the environmental impact of the project, not to shill for your personal business interests, which was the meat and potatoes of most of the pro-project comments.
Here are some specific commentators that I'm going to single out (in loose order of appearance), followed by a general wrap up:
Janice Hahn - Kicking off the comments. A I'm all for everything, but not verbally committing to anything statement. She seems to echo community concerns about both the character of San Pedro and the traffic issues.
Kara McCloud - The first non-Janice commenter, she kicked off the meeting with a sarcasm laced assault on the goals of the project.
Jack Baric - How on Earth did this guy ever helm San Pedro Magazine? All I can say is I'm glad that Joshua Steckler is running the show there now. His confusing statement was essentially an endorsement of the project as it might allow his buddy to stage a T.V. special "Christmas from the Port of the Angels" at the future whateverisbuilt.
Fred DiBernardo - Of DiBernardo Realty fame. His scare tactic, straw man laced ramble included the words "Great Silent Majority" in his opener. He was the third to speak and the only speaker who had to be shouted down for his lack of respect for the time limit. He was holding a pile of script that he had probably spent all night writing for weeks. Needless to say he endorsed the project, also using arguments that it benefits his personal business and income.
The Lone Latino - I didn't catch her name, but there was a representative from Rancho San Pedro in the house. I cared much more about what she had to say than any other speaker, I'm familiar with their position. Her concerns mainly focused on jobs and parks, both services that low income families need.
Noel Park - The first speaker to actually directly address the environmental issues, Noel's comments were focused on traffic and the lack of park space in Los Angeles, and included several documents to be entered into the public record regarding that situation.
Dr. John Miller - Following up on Noel's comments, Dr. Miller expressed concern about pollution in the area, and its health effects. He also broke down the non-functionality of the proposed public boat launch, a minor issue, but it was a reminder of how many aspects of this project are under researched.
John Papadakis - Dripping with personal vision, John assailed critics of the project. He clearly views this as his baby, and he's got bile for anyone who disagrees with him. Rather than adress the panel, he addressed the room, grabbing the mike and letting loose on those who would oppose him. Maybe if he wants to see it his way, he should buy the land from the port and pay for the project out of his pocket?
Euro Shills - a series of geriatric Dalmatian Club members spoke, at various intervals. They were there presumably to represent "the great silent majority" of elderly "living in an ethnic bubble" people who want so badly to see this project go forward. They were all highly enthused about the project.
John Mavar - still engaged in his perpetual campaign for student body president, John delivered what best might be described as a good oral book report about the project. Regardless, it was nice not to be the only person in the room under 30, if not 40.
Daniel Nord (-pictured) - clad in his lung shirt, made with soot from his porch, Daniel came out in defense of the community's right to study and be concerned about the environment that we live in. He had several documents about the lack of parks in San Pedro, including an overlay showing how the parking lots proposed on the 22nd street brown field exactly match the proposed hotels, and the conclusion that that leads to. I spoke with him after the meeting (to get his photo), and he showed me a series of photos documenting the park in his neighborhood, his alley, where kids dodge cars, condoms and crack vials as they try to play. After some chatter we also discovered that we have both been severely irritated by Harbor Division's officer Dumaplin, who knows how to do her job, and doesn't seem to care what the community thinks about that.
Howard Uller - President of the
Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council, always concerned about the little guy, Howard commented upon the impact on the economy and the lack of living wage jobs that the proposed project will provide.
David Arian - the
ILWU's David Arian spoke about the lack of union or even living wage paying jobs in the project. He also spoke about the potential to make this project a center for international labour activity.
Janet Gunther - pointed out the amount of failure occuring in large developments and malls in the region and questioned the feasability of the economics behind the project.
Sue Castillo - addressed the concerns regarding the outer harbor cruise ship terminal and the environmental and visual impact of staging cruise ships there.
Kathleen Woodfield - spoke directly at the impact of the project, noting that in the main proposal, San Pedro would see nothing but cruise ship and port improvements for the first 5 years, and that the major park wouldn't come online until 2012. She attacked the project as essentially existing to grow the cruise industry and the commercial and park developments as serving that goal.
Other Folks - some folks had a "let's get moving" statement to make, and others chose to promote the project by demonising parks. Several people are concerned about the widening of Harbor Boulevard. No one in attendance was actively against the project in principle, contrary to the statements of several pro-development commenters.
My perspective - It was sad to see members of the great silent majority attack parks and open space as job killers and as homeless magnets. I work in a park, I am well paid, have full medical and I don't spend my days cleaning up used needles and piss stains. That straw man always pisses me off, and it left me wishing I had filled out a comment card so that I could address that bogus argument.
I'm more in favour of the reduced development plan, but I'd like to see more wetlands restoration and I do think that widening Harbor Boulevard is a good idea, so long as wide, welcoming pedestrian overpasses get built to connect the community to the harbor. One of the aspects of any plan that sits uneasily with me is the lack of planning for the Warehouse Number 1 site and the berths adjacent to it. Currently they are all listed as adaptive re-use, but there appears to be no real identity or idea for the potential of those projects.
So that's my wrap up. I didn't learn anything new at this meeting, but it was interesting to see the range of perspective on the project.
