R-28 Correspondence – LBAPN
From: Anna Christensen <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 1:38 PM
To: CityClerk <[email protected]>; Mayor <[email protected]>; Council District 1 <[email protected]>; Council District 3 <[email protected]>; Council District 2 <[email protected]>; Council District 5 <[email protected]>; Council District 4 <[email protected]>; Council District 6 <[email protected]>; Council District 7 <[email protected]>; Council District 8 <[email protected]>; Council District 9 <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item 28. 23-1163, City Council Meeting 10/10/23 - Comment
-EXTERNAL-
October 10, 2023
To: Long Beach City Council
From: Long Beach Area Peace Network (LBAPN)
Re: Agenda Item 28. 23-1163, City Council Meeting 10/10/23 The Long Beach Area Peace Network requests a no vote on this item which includes additional public funding for “design services” by HED Corporation, under contract to build the Belmont Beach and Aquatic Center Project. Public Works is requesting “to increase the contract amount by $6,000,000, for a revised contract amount not to exceed $18,664,576.” It would seem that the existing design contract is sufficient. As reported in the request (R-28), under FISCAL IMPACT, “While sufficient funds are budgeted to support the contract amendment for project design services, additional funding will be required for project completion.” This is not the time to throw more money at a project which is clearly becoming less inviting, less practical, and less sustainable.
LBAPN's concerns are not merely financial, we must challenge the City’s fairy tale version of history. Their Never-ending Story of the BBAC, has victims (future Olympians, members of private swim clubs and competitive sports teams), Heroes (former 3rd District Councilmember Susie Price, former Mayor Garcia, former “Olympians, City Planners), and Villains (Surfrider, CARP, LBAPN, and SB 1137).
In 2015, when oil prices hit a low of $50 a barrel, the City drafted a list of priorities for Tidelands monies, #1 being Public Safety. That same year the City "set aside" $61,000,000 in Tidelands funds for a $103,000,000 BBAC with a bubble top, two new olympic-sized pools, a professional high dive, spas, stadium seating and a restaurant. This immediately derailed or postponed previously budgeted tidelands area projects like upgrading the pier. Private funding did not materialize, instead, costs rose due to inflation and to Coastal Commission demands that the BBAC favor community recreation over competitive sports. We then got the second “topless” evolution of the BBAC, at a cost of @ $85,000,000 (today this version would also cost more than $100,000,000).
The City is right to be concerned about funding, but wrong to propose that the BBAC is entitled to limited Tidelands monies. If SB 1137 stands, revenues from oil drilling will fall, but so will cases of asthma and other respiratory diseases, cancer, and poor infant health, illnesses which also have a financial impact. Even if SB 1137 is rejected, Tidelands funds will be increasingly in demand to maintain existing infrastructure and to adapt to Sea Level Rise. Storm events and flooding in low lying neighborhoods, salt water intrusion, critical city infrastructure, including water wells - all qualify as public safety issues, prioritized for Tidelands monies since 2015.
LBAPN supports using some of the $61,000,000 set aside to maintain and staff the existing community pools on site. We do not support the existing design or the proposed Option 1. An indoor pool provides access day and night, all year long. This allows access for working people to recreate and to bring their children to lessons year round, regardless of the weather. Given the location of the Project, in the wealthiest, whitest corner of the City, 2 bus rides and 20 minutes by car from working class neighborhoods, it cannot possibly serve as “an inspiring facility for all age groups that will engage, instruct, and train our public aquatics users, while providing equitable access to recreational water space for the larger Long Beach community in a fiscally sustainable way.”
LBAPN’s Everybody in the Pool resolution is based on hard truths that due to a history of race and class prejudice, Long Beach residents have never had equal access to public pools, beaches, or even parks. Even though access to community pools is proven to be central to ensuring that children and adults are water safe, in 100 years, Long Beach has only invested in three public pools. A public pool, proposed for the Ninth District, awaits public funding.
As a majority minority city, we must face the fact that, statistically speaking, most youth will not learn how to swim nor will most adults have the opportunity to do so. The ability to swim is a public safety issue, especially in a coastal city. It also determines who will access recreational programs like sailing and jobs like lifeguarding.
The City’s position that bussing youth from underserved neighborhoods to the BBAC will satisfy demands for public access, equitable distribution of public recreational funding, and environmental justice is delusional.
The majority of children and none of the adults living in communities deemed eligible will benefit from the proposed plan in which youth will meet up in public parks and ride buses across town to the BBAC. Funding for bussing will be limited as will the days and times of instruction and recreational swimming. The BBAC will have no seating or shade or changing or storage areas, no dining facilities or food service or picnic areas. Parents will not be comfortable bussing children across town to a location where they may or may not be supervised, nor should they be. Supervised groups will demand more staff and add to funding costs.
As for public outreach, LBAPN has had no response from the City to our request that the original Stakeholder Advisory Committee of thirteen be expanded in order that it become more diverse and include those representing districts other than the Third (see letter attached). The June 27, 2023 public meeting described by staff was held in the Third District and attended primarily by City staff, those from local competitive aquatics teams or private aquatics schools, Belmont Shore residents, and those who have commented on the BBAC in the past. There was no expression of support for the reduced design options. Even according to the survey reported by the City, 40% of respondents do not support Option 1, the version you are being requested to approve tonight.
The City’s CDP is now expiring, and the Coastal Commission is being asked to extend it for another year. Design changes and other factors will likely result in new special conditions being imposed on the Project.
The Council is forewarned that “As the Project moves forward, staff will return to the City Council with funding strategies and requests for appropriations as funding is identified.” The BBAC has never been affordable, and throwing good money after bad will not make it so. It was not meant to be equitable, and cannot be made so in this location. We ask that you reject this request and build community not privilege. We stand by the goals outlined in our Everybody in the Pool Resolution.
Long Beach Peace Network, Everybody in the Pool Resolution Recognizing both the health and safety benefits of swimming instruction and community aquatics facilities, and the need to address ongoing issues of health equity, the Long Beach Area Peace Network recommends that the City of Long Beach:
1. Ensure equal access to public pools and swimming instruction for all residents in accordance with the goals of the Healthy Communities Policy of the City of Long Beach.
2. Build and maintain a community pool in every city council district.
3. Raise community awareness as to the health and safety benefits of swimming, water sports, and lifeguard training.
4. Increase diversity and city-wide participation in public aquatics programs for youth including swimming lessons, water sports, sailing and boating, Jr. Lifeguarding, and aquatics day camps
We take this position because a significant number of children are not learning to swim and, as a consequence, drowning is a leading cause of accidental death among young people.
Evidence supports a relationship between fewer opportunities to take swimming lessons and higher minority drowning rates. USA Swimming reports that 70% of African American children and 60%-65% of all other non-white children have low or no swimming ability, compared to 40% of white children. Noting that “swimming skills can be lifesaving,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2010 that black youths ages 10- 12 are ten times more likely to drown in pools than their white peers. American Indian, Asian American, and Latino/Chicano youth are also more at risk. Long Beach, a majority- minority city, has no public pools in six of its nine districts.
From:AnnaChristensen<[email protected]>To:JoshuaHickman<[email protected]>TomModica<[email protected]>;RexRichardson<[email protected]>;CouncilDistrict3<[email protected]>;CityClerk<[email protected]>;Sent:Fri,Feb10,20239:17amSubject:Re:BBACBudgetInformation:"BelmontPlazaPoolRebuild"projectbudget(Item#19CouncilAgenda) DearMr.ModicaandMr.Hickman,NextStepsfortheBBACinclude,"Discussoptionswithstakeholdergroupspring2023."Itiscriticalthatmembershipinthisgroupbeexpandedfromthe2014StakeholderAdvisoryCommitteetoincludeinputfromacrosstheCity-includingresidents,communitygroups,athletes,andathleticteams. ItisalsoappropriatethatadditionalpublicmeetingsbeheldinmultiplelocationsacrosstheCitytoallowresidentstolearnaboutandcommentonwhatwillbethe3rdevolutionoftheBBAC.
InJuneof2014,theCityCouncilheldastudysessiontoplananewstructuretoreplacetheOlympicPool,andsuggested, "that acommunitystakeholder committeebeconvenedtoprioritizeoptional componentsof theconceptual planfor theCityCouncil toconsider for approval, prior toproceedingwiththeentitlementsprocess."InJuly, "theDepartment of Parks, RecreationandMarine, incoordinationwithThirdDistrict Councilmember SuziePriceandtheCityManager, formedanadhocBelmont Beach&AquaticsCenter StakeholdersAdvisoryCommittee.Thepurposeof theCommitteeistomakearecommendationtoCitystaff andtheMayor andMembersof theCityCouncil regardingthevariousamenitiesneededinthenewfacilitywithinthefinancial resourcesavailablefor thisproject. ThisadhocAdvisoryCommitteerepresentsthevarioususer groups, aquaticsdisciplines, residents,businesses, recreational users, andall other stakeholders."ThisthirteenmemberStakeholderAdvisoryCommitteeandtheDirectorofParks,RecreationandMarineheldthreemeetingsbeforeintroducingthefirstevolutionoftheBBAC,a$103millionstructurefocusedoncompetitiveswimminganddiving,tothegeneralpublic.
WhentheBBACcamebeforethePlanningCommission,CityCouncil,andCoastalCommission,theLongBeachAreaPeaceNetwork,criticizedthemakeupoftheStakeholderAdvisoryCommittee,asnotbeingrepresentativeoftheCityasawhole(seecommentbelow).Whileinputfromprofessionalathletes,localswimanddiveteams,andBelmontShoreresidentsandbusinesswasappropriate,excludingeveryoneelsewasnot.Additionally,StakeholderCommitteemeetingswerenotopentothepublic.TheonlyCityCouncilmembertohostpublicmeetingsontheBBACwas3rdDistrictCouncilmemberPrice,andthoseattendingwereaskedtolimitcommentstothearchitecture,Period.
LongBeachresidentsweregiventheopportunitytovoteontheOlympicPoolbeforeitwasbuiltin1968-thiswasnotthecasewiththeBBAC.WithallduerespecttotheOGthirteen,inputfromadditionalstakeholdersisclearlyjustifiedandsorelyneededasathirdevolutionoftheBBACisunderconsideration. Pleaserespondtothisrequestasap.
AnnaChristensen,LongBeachAreaPeaceNetwork(LBAPN)
LBAPNonStakeholder Committee:1. Communityinput: TheBBACisaproject of theCityof LongBeach, describedasservingtheneedsof residents,andfundedwithpublicmonies. Consideringthescaleandcost of theBBAC, publicoutreachhasbeentotallyinadequate. Themajorityof residentshaveneither beeninformedof thespecificsof theproject nor havetheybeenincludedinthedecisionmakingprocess. Thirteenof thefourteenmember Stakeholder AdvisoryCommitteefor theBBACareeither aquaticsprofessionalsor membersof the“aquaticscommunity” residinginthe3rdDistrict.Stakeholder Committeemeetingswerenot opentothepublicandnopublicrecordwasmadeof discussions. Theonlydistrict toholdcommunitymeetingswastheThird, whereresidentswereinvitedtomeet thearchitectsandcommentswerestrictlylimitedtothebuilding’sdesign. PublicconcernsastotheBBAC’slocation, size, andcost,wereraisedat thesemeetings, inanonlinesurvey, andinresponsetotheDEIR. Neither theStakeholder AdvisoryCommitteenor thePlanningDepartment appearstohavetakenthemintoconsideration.
Surfrider Foundation – Act Coastal
2021 California Coastal Commission Conservation Report Card https://www.actcoastal.org/wiki/2021_ActCoastal_Conservation_Report_Card
From:AnnaChristensen<[email protected]>To:JoshuaHickman<[email protected]>TomModica<[email protected]>;RexRichardson<[email protected]>;CouncilDistrict3<[email protected]>;CityClerk<[email protected]>;Sent:Fri,Feb10,20239:17amSubject:Re:BBACBudgetInformation:"BelmontPlazaPoolRebuild"projectbudget(Item#19CouncilAgenda) DearMr.ModicaandMr.Hickman,NextStepsfortheBBACinclude,"Discussoptionswithstakeholdergroupspring2023."Itiscriticalthatmembershipinthisgroupbeexpandedfromthe2014StakeholderAdvisoryCommitteetoincludeinputfromacrosstheCity-includingresidents,communitygroups,athletes,andathleticteams. ItisalsoappropriatethatadditionalpublicmeetingsbeheldinmultiplelocationsacrosstheCitytoallowresidentstolearnaboutandcommentonwhatwillbethe3rdevolutionoftheBBAC.
InJuneof2014,theCityCouncilheldastudysessiontoplananewstructuretoreplacetheOlympicPool,andsuggested, "that acommunitystakeholder committeebeconvenedtoprioritizeoptional componentsof theconceptual planfor theCityCouncil toconsider for approval, prior toproceedingwiththeentitlementsprocess."InJuly, "theDepartment of Parks, RecreationandMarine, incoordinationwithThirdDistrict Councilmember SuziePriceandtheCityManager, formedanadhocBelmont Beach&AquaticsCenter StakeholdersAdvisoryCommittee.Thepurposeof theCommitteeistomakearecommendationtoCitystaff andtheMayor andMembersof theCityCouncil regardingthevariousamenitiesneededinthenewfacilitywithinthefinancial resourcesavailablefor thisproject. ThisadhocAdvisoryCommitteerepresentsthevarioususer groups, aquaticsdisciplines, residents,businesses, recreational users, andall other stakeholders."ThisthirteenmemberStakeholderAdvisoryCommitteeandtheDirectorofParks,RecreationandMarineheldthreemeetingsbeforeintroducingthefirstevolutionoftheBBAC,a$103millionstructurefocusedoncompetitiveswimminganddiving,tothegeneralpublic.
WhentheBBACcamebeforethePlanningCommission,CityCouncil,andCoastalCommission,theLongBeachAreaPeaceNetwork,criticizedthemakeupoftheStakeholderAdvisoryCommittee,asnotbeingrepresentativeoftheCityasawhole(seecommentbelow).Whileinputfromprofessionalathletes,localswimanddiveteams,andBelmontShoreresidentsandbusinesswasappropriate,excludingeveryoneelsewasnot.Additionally,StakeholderCommitteemeetingswerenotopentothepublic.TheonlyCityCouncilmembertohostpublicmeetingsontheBBACwas3rdDistrictCouncilmemberPrice,andthoseattendingwereaskedtolimitcommentstothearchitecture,Period.
LongBeachresidentsweregiventheopportunitytovoteontheOlympicPoolbeforeitwasbuiltin1968-thiswasnotthecasewiththeBBAC.WithallduerespecttotheOGthirteen,inputfromadditionalstakeholdersisclearlyjustifiedandsorelyneededasathirdevolutionoftheBBACisunderconsideration. Pleaserespondtothisrequestasap.
AnnaChristensen,LongBeachAreaPeaceNetwork(LBAPN)
LBAPNonStakeholder Committee:1. Communityinput: TheBBACisaproject of theCityof LongBeach, describedasservingtheneedsof residents,andfundedwithpublicmonies. Consideringthescaleandcost of theBBAC, publicoutreachhasbeentotallyinadequate. Themajorityof residentshaveneither beeninformedof thespecificsof theproject nor havetheybeenincludedinthedecisionmakingprocess. Thirteenof thefourteenmember Stakeholder AdvisoryCommitteefor theBBACareeither aquaticsprofessionalsor membersof the“aquaticscommunity” residinginthe3rdDistrict.Stakeholder Committeemeetingswerenot opentothepublicandnopublicrecordwasmadeof discussions. Theonlydistrict toholdcommunitymeetingswastheThird, whereresidentswereinvitedtomeet thearchitectsandcommentswerestrictlylimitedtothebuilding’sdesign. PublicconcernsastotheBBAC’slocation, size, andcost,wereraisedat thesemeetings, inanonlinesurvey, andinresponsetotheDEIR. Neither theStakeholder AdvisoryCommitteenor thePlanningDepartment appearstohavetakenthemintoconsideration.