City Council on 2022-05-10 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Meeting Time: 05-10-22 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council on 2022-05-10 6:00 PM -
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
05-10-22
18:00
52 4 2 0 1
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
City Council on 2022-05-10 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 05-10-22 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
H.7. 22-4146 APPROVE A MARKETING AGREEMENT WITH
OHMCONNECT REGARDING OUR PARTNERSHIP TO BUILD A
"VIRTUAL POWER PLANT".
1 0 0 0
N.1. 22-4145 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING
UPDATES TO THE WEST BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT'S
RECYCLED WATER EXPANSION ASSESSMENT STUDY IN REDONDO
BEACH AND CURRENT RECYCLED WATER POLICIES
1 1 0 0
N.2. 22-3837 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING
DRAFT ORDINANCES AMENDING TITLE 6 BUSINESSES,
PROFESSIONS, AND TRADES, TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2, ZONING AND LAND USE AND TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 COASTAL LAND USE
PERTAINING TO CANNABIS REGULATIONS AND RECOMMEDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS
FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
FOR THE AMENDMENTS
CONSIDERATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING THE DRAFT CANNABIS
ORDINANCES AND ADDITIONAL INPUT PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC
2 1 0 1
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for H.7. 22-4146 APPROVE A MARKETING AGREEMENT WITH OHMCONNECT REGARDING OUR PARTNERSHIP TO BUILD A "VIRTUAL POWER PLANT".
Overall Sentiment
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 9:53pm 05-10-22
1. Absent production simulation runs demonstrating the resource characteristics and specific needs of the local grid, the statement
"ItispossibletomeetanyperceivedneedbytheStateforenergy,afterAESretiresitsplant,bypartneringwithOhmConnectto buildavirtualpowerplant" (format a problem of the City document) is unsupported. As an expert in electric utility planning, I cannot see any material impact from OhmConnect's activities vis a vis a 1000+ MW AES Redondo retirement on grid reliability - and grid reliability is the only reason AES Redondo is dispatched. 2) Where are the good faith estimated costs to be incurred by the City as it promote OhmConnect with social media buys, etc. I cannot see any cost estimates in the document being executed.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.1. 22-4145 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING UPDATES TO THE WEST BASIN
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT'S RECYCLED WATER EXPANSION ASSESSMENT STUDY IN REDONDO BEACH AND CURRENT
RECYCLED WATER POLICIES
Overall Sentiment
Michael Sachs
Location:
Submitted At: 12:29pm 05-10-22
Please support investments in water conservation and retention. Also, keep an open mind about the feasibility of desalinization. During severe drought there will be no water to retain or recycle. We know about the prohibitive costs and environmentally unsound factors relating to desalinization but the immense value of having a guaranteed water source for the Southbay cannot be underestimated.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.2. 22-3837 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING DRAFT ORDINANCES AMENDING TITLE 6 BUSINESSES, PROFESSIONS, AND TRADES, TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2, ZONING AND LAND USE AND TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 COASTAL LAND USE PERTAINING TO CANNABIS REGULATIONS AND RECOMMEDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR THE
AMENDMENTS
CONSIDERATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING THE DRAFT CANNABIS
ORDINANCES AND ADDITIONAL INPUT PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC
Overall Sentiment
Matthew Hinsley
Location:
Submitted At: 9:04pm 05-10-22
Good evening. My name is Matthew Hinsley and I am a resident of District 3. I am speaking as a resident tonight and I wanted to provide my feedback on the proposed ordinance. I tried as a member of the Planning Commission to bring up this recommendation but I didn't get traction so I want share it here directly to council. I agree with the maximum 2 retail dispensaries in the city. As proposed is maximum 1 per district but I think that there should be a maximum of 1 retail per zip code instead. Using the 1 per district still permits, for example, the possibility to have one on the north side of Torrance blvd. in district 2 and another on the south side of Torrance blvd. in district 1. I don't think concentrating the 2 locations to one area of city is in the best interest of the city Another example, I don't think having 2 dispensaries with 1 along Artesia in district 4 and another on Aviation in district 3 is meeting the vision of the AACAP. The Planning Commission recommended not having 2 on the same street but that is a half measure that doesn't cover all situations in my opinion. Second point, I oppose allowing it in the Galleria Regional Commercial proposal. If you read the current General Plan regional commercial zoning is for regional serving commercial businesses and I don't think cannabis is that business. If you do move forward with regional commercial zoning revise the General Plan definition so that future Planning Commissions don't vote down a future proposal as not meeting the General Plan in the regional commercial zoning. Thank you for the time and good luck with this complex subject.
James Crawford
Location:
Submitted At: 5:43pm 05-10-22
I saw this posted online today and needed to share.
Councilmember Laura Emdee must recuse herself from discussion on the proposed cannabis ordinance tonight - and in the future.
On 2/1/22 during a city council meeting it was revealed District 5 councilmember Emdee had a clandestine 2-hour phone call with the litigious drug dealer. The same one whose "citizen" initiative qualified for the ballot with cannabis storefront and operations criteria that no other company can meet except his.
Two weeks later the same pot sore owner announced on a podcast hosted by the Redondo Beach chamber of commerce VP, he is paying for a recall effort against a council member whom Emdee hates. It appears to many Emdee has a personal vendetta and wants to claw back a 3-seat majority on the council for her do-nothing “special interest” agenda. After 7 years in office Emdee’s only accomplishments have been creating the basis for numerous lawsuits against the city, and costing Redondo Beach residents by most estimates nearly $20 million dollars.
Last Friday Emdee doubled down and sent out a newsletter email that appears to show her support for the recall while at the same time denying any involvement. Speculation across the city suggests this action is a smoking gun, and possibly a quid pro quo linking Emdee to the recall after her 2-hour phone call with the litigious self- described TOXIC pot peddler trying to get a cannabis monopoly in the south bay.
We don’t know if they made a deal or not but who knows with Emdee? The deal could be as simple as allowing them to place their cannabis stores around the city, to financial support in the future if she runs for mayor. At this time, we just don’t know and we shouldn’t take any chances. But it makes no sense for Emdee to have initiated contact with this guy when he had no pending discussions or business with the city, and his rude and crude behavior during a council presentation given last October.
Councilmember Laura Emdee needs to recuse herself from all discussions on any cannabis ordinance.
This will protect the city from being further compromised or creating even more of her famous lawsuits.