BLUE FOLDER ITEM
Blue folder items are additional back up material to administrative reports and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 18, 2024
J.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
• PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
From: Stop BCHD
To: Communications; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Analysis of BCHD 2024-25 proposed budget
Date: Thursday, June 13, 2024 5:37:46 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
In the future, each line item needs to carry a breakdown of RESIDENT vs NON-RESIDENT expenditures. It appears very likely that BCHD's financial stress is a direct result of BCHD's poor and reckless decisions to spend Resident-taxpayer funds (property taxes, interest, rents, ongoing concern net revenue) and use Resident-taxpayer assets (land, buildings, credit facility) on NON-RESIDENT services.
cc: Beach Cities City Councils
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs 110-foot above the street, 800,000 sqft commercial development will inflict for the next 50-100 years.
Our neighborhoods have been burdened since 1960 by the failed South Bay Hospital project and have not received the benefit of the voter-approved acute care public hospital since 1984.Yet we still suffer 100% of the damages and we will suffer 100% of the damages of BCHDs proposal.
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Fwd: Public Comment - City Council Meeting
Date: Wednesday, June 12, 2024 6:48:37 PM
Attachments: BCHD Bond Lies.png
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
City Council Meeting PUBLIC COMMENT to District Cities. ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:47 PM
Subject: Public Comment - City Council Meeting
To: Communications <[email protected]>
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs 110-foot above the street, 800,000 sqft commercial development will inflict for the next 50-100 years. Our neighborhoods have been burdened since 1960 by the failed South Bay Hospital project and have not received the benefit of the voter-approved acute care public hospital since 1984.Yet we still suffer 100% of the damages and we will suffer 100% of the damages of BCHDs proposal.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Communications; info; [email protected]; Garth Meyer; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; Robert W. Lundy; [email protected] Subject: Is BCHD Even Capable of Telling the FULL TRUTH? Date: Monday, June 17, 2024 11:38:30 AM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Public Comment LAFCO Board, HB/RB/MB City Councils:
The Healthy Living Campus is 80% to 95% non-resident use. allcove - 91% non-resident service area from Avalon to Long Beach to the LAX area.(per BCHD SPA8 contract)
allcove is a potential $175M liability to District taxpayers (BCHD never even computed the liability of a 91% non-resident activity prior to signing contracts) RCFE - 80% non-resident tenants (per BCHD MDS zip code level analysis) PACE - 95% non-resident enrollees (BCHD has no data. 95% per National PACE Assoc data) 514 Building - 25 years of continued use based on the BEST PRACTICE in seismic ordinances (per BCHD consultant Youssef presentation to CWG) TELL THE FULL TRUTH!
A NOTE FROM OUR CEO - JUNE 13,
2024
THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 2024
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Public Comment
Date: Thursday, June 13, 2024 5:40:10 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
The following is a response to a local resident who asked for an update on BCHD's spending.
Dear Redacted,
That's a BIG question. Here's the topics and some explanation.
Hospital Building
The hospital building is aging, and according to BCHD's consultants, it can operate until 2040 without any seismic work. At the end of that period, it either needs to be torn down or retrofitted. BCHD CEO wants to tear it down now in order to make room for the Healthy Living Campus (HLC). Originally that was the responsibility of the contractor building the HLC. Now BCHD wants about $15M of the $30M bond to tear the building down and fix the hole it leaves.
allcove
BCHD agreed to build an allcove building and provide allcove services funding for 30 years. allcove is a youth mental health program that is probably good - but BCHD is the wrong provider. BCHD agreed to service 1.4M population area from Avalon to Long Beach, then up to the LA area. That is 91% non-residents/non-taxpayers of the District and only 9% resident/taxpayers. That is also roughly a $175M obligation with NO FUNDING except BCHD taxpayers after June 1 2026.
Healthy Living Campus - assisted living
BCHD plans to tear down the hospital in the middle of the campus, and let a 100% private contractor lease 3 acres for 95 years for an expensive, market rate, assisted living complex.
The complex will be at least twice the size of the hospital and be along Beryl and Flagler streets. It will be 100 to 150 feet above the homes to the north and east. BCHD will have 0% ownership. According to BCHD's consultants, only 20% of the tenants will be from residenttaxpayers and the other 80% will be (40% PV, 10% Torrance and other surrounding cities, 30% COMPLETELY OUTSIDE THE AREA).
Healthy Living Campus - PACE
BCHD plans to get a vendor to operate a Program of All Inclusive Care. There are already several PACE's that service 90254, 90266, 90277, and 90278.PACE is basically a combination between adult daycare and a nursing home. All enrollees have to be eligible for nursing home care, but have a home where they can safely go at night. Only 1 in 1000 seniors uses PACE, so that means that the 3 beach cities will only need 17 PACE spots. The other 383 are planned to service non-resident/non-taxpayers. So it's 5% residents, 95% non-residents.
Hope that helps. Let us know if questions.
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs 110-foot above the street, 800,000 sqft commercial development will inflict for the next 50-100 years.
Our neighborhoods have been burdened since 1960 by the failed South Bay Hospital project and have not received the benefit of the voter-approved acute care public hospital since 1984.Yet we still suffer 100% of the damages and we will suffer 100% of the damages of BCHDs proposal.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance; [email protected]; Holly J. Mitchell; CityClerk; Zein Obagi; [email protected]; [email protected]; Michael Webb Subject: Re: Thank You for Participating in the Metro Board Meeting Date: Sunday, June 16, 2024 3:22:16 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
What is the status of correcting Staff's flawed guidance? On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:17 PM Mark Nelson (Home Gmail) wrote:
PUBLIC COMMENT - Metro Board, LA County Supervisors, Redondo Beach City Council, Redondo Beach City Attorney, Lawndale City Council, Directors Butts and Mitchell IN RESPONSE TO THE GREENLINE TEAM'S RECENT PRESS RELEASE:
Is that REALLY what the Metro Board approved? I don't think so.
This press release appears to be staff's interpretation and it is incorrect. With many, many years and projects experience, as well as agency and corporate board interaction, I definitely cannot interpret the guidance to be "head off with the LPA for months of first-time analysis and description in the CEQA process, issue an FEIR on the Hybrid LPA, and then solicit comments on the FEIR that would include the Hawthorne alternative." That is a sure recipe for the Hawthorne route to be discarded - and that was not the stated intent of the Board..
Instead, an appropriate process is:
First, the Hybrid alternative never even existed in the DEIR, therefore it has never been analyzed nor commented upon by the public. The DEIR provides no foundation for the Hybrid alternative, nor even a definition of the Hybrid alternative. The Hybrid alternative needs to be specified and analyzed by staff, added to the DEIR via an amendment, public hearings held, and the DEIR recirculated for comment with the amendment.
Second, the comments to DEIR need to have a public hearing for discussion. At that time, the Board will determine if the additional information on the Hybrid alternative and the Hawthorne alternative leads them to continue with the LPA of Hybrid, or if it shifts them to the Hawthorne alternative.
Finally, the FEIR can incorporate the direction of the Board and be issued for comment with its required 10-day minimum comment window.
Staff needs to return to the next Board meeting for clarification, as staff's interpretation requires significant adjustment.
Mark Nelson
Retired Edison Development and Planning Executive
Sponsor of several CEQA and NEPA analyses for billions in projects Expert Witness
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Metro C Line (Green) Extension to Torrance; [email protected]; Holly J. Mitchell; CityClerk; Zein Obagi; [email protected]; [email protected]; Michael Webb Subject: Re: Thank You for Participating in the Metro Board Meeting Date: Monday, June 17, 2024 4:24:18 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Has Metro's staff received proper guidance yet. We all have video recordings of the discussion and the motion. Staff needs to be reminded not to rig the process.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:17 PM Mark Nelson (Home Gmail) > wrote:
PUBLIC COMMENT - Metro Board, LA County Supervisors, Redondo Beach City Council, Redondo Beach City Attorney, Lawndale City Council, Directors Butts and Mitchell IN RESPONSE TO THE GREENLINE TEAM'S RECENT PRESS RELEASE:
Is that REALLY what the Metro Board approved? I don't think so.
This press release appears to be staff's interpretation and it is incorrect. With many, many years and projects experience, as well as agency and corporate board interaction, I definitely cannot interpret the guidance to be "head off with the LPA for months of first-time analysis and description in the CEQA process, issue an FEIR on the Hybrid LPA, and then solicit comments on the FEIR that would include the Hawthorne alternative." That is a sure recipe for the Hawthorne route to be discarded - and that was not the stated intent of the Board..
Instead, an appropriate process is:
First, the Hybrid alternative never even existed in the DEIR, therefore it has never been analyzed nor commented upon by the public. The DEIR provides no foundation for the Hybrid alternative, nor even a definition of the Hybrid alternative. The Hybrid alternative needs to be specified and analyzed by staff, added to the DEIR via an amendment, public hearings held, and the DEIR recirculated for comment with the amendment.
Second, the comments to DEIR need to have a public hearing for discussion. At that time, the Board will determine if the additional information on the Hybrid alternative and the Hawthorne alternative leads them to continue with the LPA of Hybrid, or if it shifts them to the Hawthorne alternative.
Finally, the FEIR can incorporate the direction of the Board and be issued for comment with its required 10-day minimum comment window.
Staff needs to return to the next Board meeting for clarification, as staff's interpretation requires significant adjustment.
Mark Nelson
Retired Edison Development and Planning Executive
Sponsor of several CEQA and NEPA analyses for billions in projects Expert Witness