City Council on 2026-09-15 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Meeting Time: 09-15-26 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council on 2026-09-15 6:00 PM -
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
09-15-26
18:00
82 41 26 11 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 2026-09-15 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 09-15-26 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
H.5. 26-1087 APPROVE CONTRACTS UNDER $35,000:
1. APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH STELLEN DESIGN LLC FOR AS
NEEDED CITY BRAND AND LOGO DESIGN SERVICES IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,500 FOR THE TERM SEPTEMBER 15,
2026 TO SEPTEMBER 14, 2027
CONTACT: JANE CHUNG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER
2. APPROVE AN APPLICATION TO OBTAIN RECERTIFICATION OF
THE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING A
STATEMENT OF INTERESTS, FORM 700 WITH THE FAIR POLICITCAL PRACTICES COMMISSION (FPPC) NOT TO EXCEED $1,000.
CONTACT: ELEANOR MANZANO, CITY CLERK
1 0 1 0
H.7. 26-0999 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2609-075
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE PAINTING OF THE RAIL
BRIDGE CROSSING AT ARTESIA BOULEVARD AS "MAINTENANCE"
AND EXEMPTING IT FROM FORMAL BIDDING REQUIREMENTS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 19.1(a) OF THE CITY CHARTER OF
REDONDO BEACH
APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SIGNATURE PAINTING INC. FOR
MAINTENANCE PAINTING SERVICES OF THE RAIL CROSSING
BRIDGE ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD, JOB NO. 41520, FOR A NOT-TOEXCEED AMOUNT OF $225,000 4 0 4 0
H.8. 26-1000 APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH ALTA PLANNING +
DESIGN, INC. FOR THE DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL
IMPROVEMENTS AT BERYL ST AND NORTH MARIA AVE IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $79,700 AND A TERM THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 15, 2029
1 0 1 0
H.9. 26-1056 APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH EMPIRE PIPE CLEANING AND EQUIPMENT, INC. FOR SEWER LINE
CLEANING AND ROOT REMOVAL SERVICES FOR AN ADDITIONAL
AMOUNT OF $1,213,714 AND A NEW NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL OF
$2,162,608 AND TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT TO
SEPTEMBER 14, 2029
1 0 1 0
H.13. 26-1088 APPROVE A GRANT AWARD PACKAGE AND
CONDITIONS, AND A CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES
STATEMENT WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF
JUSTICE PROGRAMS, BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, FOR THE FY 2025 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT
(JAG) PROGRAM LOCAL FORMULA IN AN AMOUNT OF $16,336, FOR THE TERM OCTOBER 1, 2024 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2027, AND
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE BOTH ITEMS ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY
ADOPT BY 4/5THS VOTE AND BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC2609-076 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR
2026 - 2027 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $16,336 IN BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE FY25 EDWARD BYRNE
MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM LOCAL
FORMULA FUND FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL
GRANTS FUND
2 0 1 0
N. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION 4 2 0 0
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
N.1. 26-1125 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE
SEASIDE LAGOON REHABILITATION PROJECT
APPROVE THE FINAL PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL OF A
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR THE SEASIDE LAGOON
REHABILITATION PROJECT AT 200 PORTOFINO WAY
APPROVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL EXEMPTION DECLARATION FOR
THE PROJECT
28 24 3 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.5. 26-1087 APPROVE CONTRACTS UNDER $35,000:
1. APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH STELLEN DESIGN LLC FOR AS NEEDED CITY BRAND AND LOGO DESIGN SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,500 FOR THE TERM SEPTEMBER 15, 2026 TO SEPTEMBER 14, 2027 CONTACT: JANE CHUNG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER
2. APPROVE AN APPLICATION TO OBTAIN RECERTIFICATION OF THE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING A STATEMENT OF INTERESTS, FORM 700 WITH THE FAIR POLICITCAL PRACTICES COMMISSION (FPPC) NOT TO EXCEED $1,000.
CONTACT: ELEANOR MANZANO, CITY CLERK
Overall Sentiment
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:39pm 09-13-26
We have wasted enough money already on logos, street signs, street signs with new logos, police vehicles with new logos ... BLAH BLAH BLAH. STOP THE SPENDING
Agenda Item: eComments for H.7. 26-0999 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2609-075 A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE PAINTING OF THE RAIL BRIDGE CROSSING AT ARTESIA BOULEVARD AS "MAINTENANCE" AND EXEMPTING IT FROM FORMAL BIDDING REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 19.1(a) OF THE CITY CHARTER OF REDONDO BEACH APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SIGNATURE PAINTING INC. FOR MAINTENANCE PAINTING SERVICES OF THE RAIL CROSSING BRIDGE ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD, JOB NO. 41520, FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $225,000 Overall Sentiment
Nainsi Skiba
Location:
Submitted At: 2:16pm 09-15-26
There should be no awarding of sole-source contracts, where competitive bidding is not a factor. Safety, durability, work quality, and fair pricing should be demonstrated before such contract is awarded. Please vote NO on Resolution CC-2609-075.
Anneke Blair
Location:
Submitted At: 1:59pm 09-15-26
I am submitting this comment in strong opposition to Item H.7 (Resolution CC-2609-075, File 26-0999), which authorizes a $225,000 sole-source contract to Signature Painting Inc. by classifying the Artesia Boulevard rail bridge project as exempt "maintenance" under Section 19.1(a) of the City Charter.
Competitive bidding is not merely bureaucratic red tape; it is the fundamental mechanism that protects Redondo Beach taxpayers, guarantees price discovery, and ensures transparency in the expenditure of public funds. A $225,000 paint job is a substantial public commitment. Invoking Charter Section 19.1(a) to sidestep competitive bidding on a major infrastructure visual project sets a concerning precedent and undermines public trust.
Painting a structural railroad bridge involves complex logistics, safety parameters, specialized surface preparation, and coating durability. Given the scale of this expenditure, our community deserves certainty that we are securing the highest-quality workmanship at the best market rate. Handing a quarter-million-dollar contract directly to a single vendor without testing the market removes all competitive pricing pressure and denies other qualified local contractors the opportunity to submit proposals.
Unless staff can demonstrate a genuine, urgent public safety emergency that legally and practically precludes competitive solicitation, this contract must follow standard public works procurement.
I urge the City Council to vote NO on Resolution CC-2609-075. Direct staff to issue a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) through competitive bidding to ensure accountability, fair market pricing, and responsible stewardship of public tax dollars.
Niecia Staggs
Location:
Submitted At: 11:45pm 09-14-26
It seems that an expenditure of $225,000 should be subject to the competitive bidding process. This is the taxpayer’s money.
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:41pm 09-13-26
Sounds like a scam by the Council. Isn't there a reason for bids? Something like SAVING MONEY FOR TAXPAYERS? WTH gentlemen and lady?
Agenda Item: eComments for H.8. 26-1000 APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC. FOR THE
DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT BERYL ST AND NORTH MARIA AVE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $79,700 AND A TERM THROUGH SEPTEMBER 15, 2029
Overall Sentiment
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:42pm 09-13-26
This looks like an $80K directed contract. Worse yet, $80K for an intersection? WTH? Taxpayers DON'T WANT THIS EXCESSIVE SPENDING.
Agenda Item: eComments for H.9. 26-1056 APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH EMPIRE PIPE CLEANING AND EQUIPMENT, INC. FOR SEWER LINE CLEANING AND ROOT REMOVAL SERVICES FOR AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $1,213,714 AND A NEW NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL OF $2,162,608 AND TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 14, 2029
Overall Sentiment
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:43pm 09-13-26
Go out to bid first and demonstrate this is a value.
Agenda Item: eComments for H.13. 26-1088 APPROVE A GRANT AWARD PACKAGE AND CONDITIONS, AND A CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES STATEMENT WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, FOR THE FY 2025 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM LOCAL FORMULA IN AN AMOUNT OF $16,336, FOR THE TERM OCTOBER 1, 2024 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2027, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE BOTH ITEMS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ADOPT BY 4/5THS VOTE AND BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2609-076 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2026 - 2027 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $16,336 IN BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE FY25 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM LOCAL FORMULA FUND FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE
PROGRAMS, TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANTS FUND
Overall Sentiment
Nainsi Skiba
Location:
Submitted At: 2:11pm 09-15-26
I oppose additional Flock cameras until comprehensive privacy protections, third-party audit mandates, and clear policy restrictions are available for community review and transparency.
Anneke Blair
Location:
Submitted At: 2:03pm 09-15-26
I am submitting this comment in strong opposition to the proposed expansion and contract renewal for additional Flock Safety automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras.
Expanding mass surveillance networks across Redondo Beach raises serious civil liberties, data privacy, and governance concerns that have not been adequately addressed. Mass collection of vehicle movement data creates a warrantless digital dragnet tracking law-abiding residents going about their daily routines: driving to work, dropping children off at school, visiting medical offices, or attending places of worship.
Crucial questions regarding oversight remain unanswered:
Data Sharing and Retention: Who accesses this data outside local law enforcement? Clear, binding safeguards must prohibit sharing local travel patterns with outside jurisdictions, out-of-state entities, or federal agencies without a specific, locally vetted warrant.
Audit and Transparency: How often are access logs audited for misuse, and will those independent audit reports be made fully accessible to the public?
Measurable ROI: The city continues to allocate substantial taxpayer dollars toward subscription renewals and camera additions without concrete, independent data proving that expanding fixed-camera counts yields a proportional reduction in crime.
Public safety strategies must strike a deliberate balance between proactive law enforcement and safeguarding fundamental privacy rights. Blanket deployment of AI-powered surveillance without rigorous public input, strict retention limits, and independent oversight erodes civil liberties.
I urge the City Council to vote NO on authorizing additional Flock cameras and contract expansions until comprehensive data privacy guardrails, third-party audit mandates, and clear policy restrictions are brought forward for dedicated community review.
Agenda Item: eComments for N. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION Overall Sentiment
Jill Johnson
Location:
Submitted At: 2:15pm 09-15-26
Please move forward and approve municipal Phase 1 modernization for Seaside Lagoon today. Under Measure C and our certified Local Coastal Program, our sovereign public parkland cannot be shrunk or privatized. Do not stall three years of completed engineering and $10 million in secured public funding for speculative commercial wave pool concepts. Keep Seaside Lagoon 100% public otherwise it will be lost forever - you can't get it back what makes Redondo Beach uniquely Redondo Beach. (citizen and homeowner since 2001 and two blocks from the Harbor). A wave pool is super cool, but find another space to either add in addition to the Lagoon, but do not take away from the lagoon.
Niecia Staggs
Location:
Submitted At: 12:24pm 09-15-26
I visited Seaside Lagoon many times as a child, and have many fond memories there. I am in favor of moving forward on the phase one modernization plans, without any delays. Redondo Beach cannot risk losing the grant money to modernize this unique and valuable site!
Please do not consider letting capitalists exploit this or other public recreation sites! The purpose of a park is NOT to earn money! It is there for recreation! We do not want or need to monetize every square inch of our city.
If wealthy individuals desire a wave pool, let them find and purchase an inland location like the South Bay Galleria parking lots, and build their surfing Disneyland there. We should not give them public parkland for their private enjoyment.
We have voted several times to keep big development ideas out of our quaint and functional harbor. I have personally used the drive up boat launch many times. This needs to be preserved for the public. I am really looking forward to the planned restrooms and showers near the boat launch! NO WAVE POOL IN KING HARBOR!
Thank you for your consideration.
Amy Russell
Location:
Submitted At: 1:54pm 09-14-26
Please approve municipal Phase 1 modernization for Seaside Lagoon this Tuesday. Under Measure C and our certified Local Coastal Program, our sovereign public parkland cannot be shrunk or privatized. Do not stall three years of completed engineering and $10 million in secured public funding for speculative commercial wave pool concepts. Keep Seaside Lagoon 100% public.
Families need safe and affordable recreation opportunities. No private developer should profit from using public land—especially when the plan significantly reduces the size of the public space in favor of recreation for the rich.
Modernize yes. Monetize no.
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:44pm 09-13-26
Support spending the $10M as expected on Phase 1 (actually the remaining $7M). Oppose any wave park consideration for Phase 1.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.1. 26-1125 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE SEASIDE LAGOON
REHABILITATION PROJECT
APPROVE THE FINAL PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL OF A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR THE SEASIDE LAGOON REHABILITATION PROJECT AT 200 PORTOFINO WAY
APPROVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL EXEMPTION DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT Overall Sentiment
Mark Polak
Location:
Submitted At: 8:19pm 09-15-26
Listening to the testimony, I'm hearing considerable discontent with all available options. It's my opinion that when weighing the future of the Seaside Lagoon we should consider all of the options, including those that require repeal of the portions of the charter amendment that are severely restricting our choices. I believe that this has been the elephant in the room all night.
Jacob Mark
Location:
Submitted At: 7:46pm 09-15-26
No one voted for a 5 foot FRESHWATER pool with partial sand. We need to go back to the drawing board and start fundraising so we can do this project correctly. Don’t let today’s lack of money dictate the next 50 years.
Maricela Guillermo
Location:
Submitted At: 7:25pm 09-15-26
I don’t believe Redondo Beach needs a wave pool, especially not in Seaside Lagoon. We already have the ocean and a strong beach culture, and Seaside Lagoon is valuable public waterfront space that should be preserved and improved for broader community use. We should protect and preserve our NATURAL environment and anything that helps maintain the character and beauty of our coastline.
Angela Ho
Location:
Submitted At: 6:37pm 09-15-26
I support moving forward with Redondo Beach residents backed current plan for phase 1 to renovate the Seaside Lagoon ASAP, before we lose the hard earned state grant. Tweak details with engineering input, as needed.
I support keeping Seaside Lagoon as a public park in its entirety and keep Redondo, Redondo. We are not Manhattan Beach, we are not Hermosa. We invested our lifetime saving to live in RB because it is MB or HB.
The wave pool vision may be a great fit elsewhere, but it is a misfit here.
Charlie Cangialosi
Location:
Submitted At: 6:33pm 09-15-26
What I’m witnessing here is MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction.
The Surf Club has already chosen its path. It took the smoldering resentment within this community and turned it into a funeral pyre for its own reputation and brand. They assured their destruction.
There’s an old saying: don’t listen to what people say—watch what they do.
The Surf Club says it supports public access. Yet the picnic tables adjacent to the club in Seaside Lagoon have been reserved every since the club opened. Mr. Sanford’s Facebook post today even shows the reservation signs on July 4th. Did the Surf Club reserve them? If so, the practical effect is restricting public access around the club and they are engaging in commercial redlining.
Now, what they are proposing is just another attempt to control the music festival’s footprint. Everyone knows that is why they took over those two locations. Let’s stop pretending that the location is the perfect spot for a private club, it’s not. The only reason the Club is where it is, so they could control the parking lot and remove any resistant from an independent business.
Most concerning is the difference between the Club’s public message and its private language. I received an email from a senior member of Surf Club leadership seeking support that described Seaside Lagoon as the “shithole it’s always been” and referred to opponents as “dipshits and trolls.” That speaks for itself.
But the larger issue is what the City, Mayor and Council do next.
Delaying Phase 1 would reinforce the perception that the Surf Club has outsized influence over City decisions.
You will be destroying your reputations, your credibility, the City’s reputation and you will lose your ability to govern. The Citizens of Redondo Beach cannot have you do that at a time when Redondo Beach faces real generational issues:
Pier infrastructure, Beach Cities Health District, Manhattan Beach Boulevard development, Basin One renovation, PCH retail revitalization, the Galleria reimagining, and the redevelopment of the Power Plant property.
Those are the issues this Council should be focused on. Do not assure our cities Destruction over this. Approve Phase 1.
MAry Simun
Location:
Submitted At: 5:14pm 09-15-26
Seaside Lagoon needs revitalization, absolutely. The remodeling plan needs to address important issues such as water quality (in the Lagoon and in the ocean), coastal access for all, potential runoff from landscaped ares (petrochemicals including fertilizers and herbicides), coastal erosion and sea level rise (there is a Kelvin wave coming), and other factors that need to be addressed to make this public playground a thriving and sustainable jewel of Redondo Beach. I was present at the CC meeting when this was discussed, and it left me with many unanswered questions, and concerns, about how this plan would result in a vastly improved public recreation area that would withstand the test of time, weather, climate changes, and human engagement. Please take the necessary time to ensure that the plan ensures a positive legacy for this park. We need more public access to open spaces, and not less! Thank you.
Andrew Harrison
Location:
Submitted At: 5:05pm 09-15-26
Please vote YES tonight to approve municipal Phase 1 modernization for Seaside Lagoon. Having our $10M state grant timeline secure means Council can proceed confidently with our public plan. Under Measure C and our certified Local Coastal Program, our sovereign public parkland cannot be shrunk or privatized. Do not delay completed engineering for speculative private concepts. Keep Seaside Lagoon 100% public.
Darryl Boyd
Location:
Submitted At: 5:02pm 09-15-26
Move on with Phase 1! Alan Sanford is a con man & a non Resident who can not be allowed to privatize our Seaside Lagoon & create his own elitist members only empire. He should not be allowed to monopolize the Redondo Beach Marina. No wave pool & NO to Alan Sanford! Lisa Youngworth
Location:
Submitted At: 3:54pm 09-15-26
Why is the City Council entertaining a wave pool presentation that appears to move away from the existing Seaside Lagoon plan rather than identifying practical improvements to it? The Council was asked to review the existing plan, hear public input, and consider reasonable modifications.
Instead, it now appears the City is exploring an entirely different concept after letting the Habor Commission run wild.
That raises a basic question: What is driving this change, and what evidence supports it? Where’s the economic analysis? Where’s the feasibility study? Where’s the environmental and regulatory analysis? Most importantly, where’s the evidence that this proposal has a realistic path to approval by the Coastal Commission?
A fundamental redesign to accommodate something as significant as a wave pool is not a minor modification. It could require at least 4 years of additional studies, redesign, regulatory review, and public debate—with no guarantee of approval.
Meanwhile, there is an existing plan that can be evaluated and improved. The Council should focus on what can realistically be delivered rather than diverting time and resources toward a speculative alternative.
The public also deserves transparency about who is advocating for this change and who could benefit from it. If this proposal is truly in the public interest, then the supporting economic, feasibility, environmental, and regulatory information should be available for public review.
Follow the facts, follow the money, and follow who benefits.
The City Council represents the residents of Redondo Beach—not developers, special interests, or predetermined agendas. With that responsibility comes an obligation to act independently, transparently, and in the community’s best interests.
I urge the City Council to return its focus to the existing Seaside Lagoon plan, consider practical improvements, and require clear evidence that any alternative being pursued is financially, environmentally, and regulatorily feasible before allowing it to delay an achievable project.
Residents deserve a project that can actually be delivered—not another speculative process that could delay progress for years.
Carissa Robinson
Location:
Submitted At: 2:54pm 09-15-26
I urge you to move Phase 1 of the Seaside Lagoon Rehabilitation Project forward and submit the Coastal Development Permit application to the California Coastal Commission.
This project represents years of planning, public process, design work, and investment. The City has secured significant State funding to rehabilitate Seaside Lagoon, and we should not allow the pursuit of a perfect plan to become the reason we abandon years of work and start over.
Phase 1 does not have to resolve every issue or represent the final vision for Seaside Lagoon. There will continue to be opportunities to refine the project, address legitimate concerns, and improve future phases. But the important thing tonight is to keep the rehabilitation moving forward.
Seaside Lagoon is a public recreational resource on California public tidelands. Its future should center on public access and public benefit. We have an opportunity to preserve and improve a place where children, families, seniors, swimmers, and people of different economic circumstances can enjoy our waterfront.
If funding is a concern, please do not treat that as a reason to stop Phase 1. Treat it as a reason to fight for more funding.
The $10 million State grant should be a foundation to build upon, not a ceiling on what this community ultimately deserves. Costs have increased and circumstances have changed since that funding was secured. I urge the Council to advocate in Sacramento, work with our State representatives, and aggressively pursue additional grants and public funding for future phases of the Lagoon.
We can do both: move Phase 1 forward now while continuing to pursue the resources necessary to make Seaside Lagoon even better.
Please submit the Coastal Development Permit application and keep this project moving. Invest in the public amenity we already have, protect it, improve it, and ensure it continues to serve everyone.
Karen Montgomery
Location:
Submitted At: 2:08pm 09-15-26
Please keep the focus on working to approve Phase 1 upgrade for Seaside Lagoon.
With the limitation of city funds, it seems a costly set back to put our staff and time into a separate project of accepting new proposals.
This takes away from the work with the commission on the unapproved changes due to budget concerns.
The cost will only increase as time goes on for current Phased implementation plan. The sooner we move forward, the sooner the city will be relieved of the enormous yearly fines we incur for current situation.
We also must use the $10M of secured funds already approved on the current proposal. Seems we will lose that grant if we open the door to the very long process of reviewing new proposals.
Please keep Seaside lagoon public and finish this long awaited and necessary modernization.
Thank you!
K.C. Montgomery
Redondo resident & homeowner, most of my life
REFERENCE: Longer letter emailed to City Clerk, my councilman, and Mayor Light, for Blue folder items.
Thank you!
Nainsi Skiba
Location:
Submitted At: 1:59pm 09-15-26
I support going forward with Phase 1 of the Seaside Lagoon reconfiguration, updating, repairs -- and transparency so that residents can be informed every step of the way and give input. In no way should this project be delayed unnecessarily, or altered for the purpose of reimagining a wave pool to satisfy developers seeking an additional amenity to replace or limit the Lagoon. Due diligence and transparency are needed. Fix whatever needs fixing and let's roll with this. Any other projects for development at our beach must be shelved until this is completed. The city is under no obligation to approve any other beach attraction at this location. We are at Phase 1. The Harbor Commission voted against Phase1 in its current form. Please do what is necessary to bring this renovation to completion.
Kristi Mickler
Location:
Submitted At: 1:46pm 09-15-26
I urge the City Council to move forward with Phase One of the Seaside Lagoon project and not tie its approval to a newly proposed private wave-pool concept.
There is no perfect design. The Harbor Commission raised legitimate concerns, and those should be addressed through the normal design process. Working through challenges is part of designing a major public project—it is not a reason to abandon a two-year process and start over.
The financial case for the wave pool also needs serious scrutiny. At roughly four rides per hour, eight hours a day, 365 days a year, that is about 11,680 rides annually. Even assuming a generous $1.7 million in annual revenue, a $150+ million project would take more than 85 years to recover its initial cost. That doesn't include maintenance, staffing, utilities, insurance, repairs, or equipment replacement.
We've also heard comparisons to the proposed El Segundo wave pool, with proponents saying Redondo's smaller facility would not compete. But if Redondo's wave pool is smaller and offers a more limited experience, why would customers pay premium prices? And if pricing must be lower, how does the projected revenue work? The financial assumptions need to be demonstrated, not assumed.
The timing also deserves transparency. The City is negotiating with BeachLife regarding Seaside Lagoon, while this new commercial concept is being introduced. I’m not suggesting that proves anyone’s motives, but the public deserves to know whether these discussions are connected and whether changing direction could affect the City's negotiating position.
If Council wants to explore a wave pool, separate it from Phase One and evaluate it through a transparent process with real financials, public-access requirements, legal and Coastal Commission review, and a fair procurement process.
Protect the $10 million state grant. Move the public project forward. Keep Seaside Lagoon a public park and public recreational resource.
Modernize, don’t privatize.
Anneke Blair
Location:
Submitted At: 1:23pm 09-15-26
I urge you to vote YES tonight to advance the municipal Phase 1 modernization for Seaside Lagoon.
As a fiduciary body, your priority tonight must be advancing Phase 1. Approving Phase 1 does not freeze our options; capital design is fundamentally iterative. A YES vote tonight secures our shovel-ready baseline, keeps our scheduled 2028 completion on track, and protects our $10 million in awarded state grant funds. From this approved foundation, Council retains full authority to direct staff on within-scope refinements, including closedloop Ozone/UV filtration and clean sand. Pausing today discards over $2 million in taxpayer funds already invested and three years of engineering.
Do not stall a funded municipal park scheduled for 2028 completion to chase speculative commercial wave pool schemes:
Child Care and Summer Camp Crisis: Seaside Lagoon is home to our City's most vital and affordable summer day camp. Hundreds of working families rely on this safe, calm-water facility for essential summer child care.
Hitting pause on Phase 1 construction guarantees multi-year delays that will displace our City camps, leaving working parents with nowhere affordable to send their kids.
Phase 1 Protects Public Space: Phase 1 preserves open parkland for all. In contrast, the wave pool scheme fences off 70% of our calm water for 50 paying surfers an hour at $150 to $200 each. Trading acres of open $10 family recreation for an exclusive surf club and $25 hamburgers violates Measure C and our Local Coastal Program.
Severe Liability and Fiscal Exposure: Proponents offer back-of-the-napkin math without an audited capital stack.
An industrial wave basin invites catastrophic premises and bodily injury liability on sovereign tidelands, putting taxpayers directly at risk for claims and abandonment costs.
Approve Phase 1 tonight. Keep our state funding, protect our summer camp, stay on schedule for 2028, and refine our design iteratively.
Niki Negrete-Mitchell
Location:
Submitted At: 1:17pm 09-15-26
I support staying on track with Phase 1 bringing it to compliance in any particular aspect of the current plan as needed. But this must happen sooner rather than later as the Waterfront has been tied up for way too long due to developers' over the top unrealistic design concepts. THAT is what's hurting economic viability of the local businesses, and yet another over the top design concept is not the answer.
As a public state regional park it is quite bold to try and come in through city friendships to try and make a land grab for private enterprise. I hope, and I do believe, nobody on this council is susceptible to being swept up by corporate speak and promises of a fantastical economic windfall a wave pool boondoggle would bring.
Let's please keep moving on this, while keeping it real.
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 12:44pm 09-15-26
I suppose revision of the Phase 1 plan to meet sea-level rise in 2050 PRIOR to any submission. Without that, I MUST OPPOSE.
The special Harbor Commission meeting demonstrated that this project's design has lacked communication with the Commission. Further, the Staff presentation to Commission demonstrated that the plan fails to meet 2050 sea-level rise specifications and in fact, Staff has no idea what year it will be overrun by the overall impacts of sea-level rise, including but not limited underground hydrostatics.
Based on a review of the Redondo Beach Harbor Commission meeting transcripts from August 25, 2026, and September 14, 2026:
Sea-Level Rise Projections Compliance Seaside Lagoon Phase 1 Project: Not compliant.
During the August 25, 2026 meeting, the project design team explicitly confirmed that the Phase 1 redesign was developed for current conditions rather than future sea-level rise projections. It was stated that adjusting the elevation to accommodate future sea-level rise would require raising the seawall/grade by two feet, which was not incorporated due to cost, geotechnical constraints, and structural impacts to surrounding amenities.
Proposed SanfordWAVE Project: Not determined/unvetted.
In the September 14, 2026 meeting, Alan Sanford stated that his proposed concept "would build for 2050 sea levels". However, commissioners and public speakers noted that the SanfordWAVE proposal was purely a preliminary concept that had not undergone official engineering, environmental, or California Coastal Commission review to verify compliance.
Design Year Sea-Level Represented
Seaside Lagoon Phase 1 Project: The design team explicitly stated that the facility is designed "for now" (current sea level / current high tide lines) rather than future projection years.
Commissioners noted that it fails to meet both the 2050 state guidelines and the 2100 projections.
Proposed SanfordWAVE Project: Representation was made that the concept is intended to be designed for 2050 sea-level rise projections.
Ronnie Brooks
Location:
Submitted At: 12:07pm 09-15-26
I support Phase 1, but the City of Redondo Beach must never privatize public property for private profit. Surfers already have access near the breakwater, Hermosa, or Manhattan, as we've always done; residents should not be burdened with massive structures, environmental harm, or commercialization pushed by people who do not live here. Protect our coastline and community—approve Phase 1, but reject any future privatization.
Barbara Epstein
Location:
Submitted At: 11:44am 09-15-26
I support reviewing the engineering plan for Phase One of the Seaside Lagoon WITH THE PUBLIC, before moving forward to finalize it.
I recommend a public meeting to present any changes from the original plan, then response from the public needs to be considered before moving forward to finalize it. There appears to be much uncertainty by the public, and the engineering team about actual implementation of the revised plan.
Using the Seaside Lagoon year round for public and private events makes perfect sense.
As always, I remain opposed to any transfer of public parkland to private commercial control.
Ira Ellman
Location:
Submitted At: 11:36am 09-15-26
I support moving forward with utilizing the state grant to renovate the Seaside Lagoon. Redondo Beach has spent years on Phase 1 of the King Harbor Amenities Plan. This will enhance the Lagoon, eliminate annual water discharge fines, and open the park to public use for the 9 months of the year it's not functioning as a summer water recreation feature. A last minute, unvetted, divisive and out of nowhere plan for a wave pool should not even be considered. This space is a State Regional Park located on state tidelands and controlled by the State Lands Commissions and California Coastal Commission. This treasure in Redondo Beach is utilized by families and kids’ camps.
Sally Tanner Fucci
Location:
Submitted At: 11:18am 09-15-26
In strong support of moving forward with Phase 1 of the Seaside Lagoon Rehabilitation Project.
Seaside Lagoon has been an important public recreational resource in Redondo Beach for decades. It is more than a facility—it is part of what makes our waterfront special and provides families, children, residents, and visitors with access to recreation in a unique coastal setting.
I believe the City should move forward with Phase 1 and take advantage of the funding that has already been secured for this project. The City received a $10 million State grant specifically to help rehabilitate Seaside Lagoon, and the current staff report states that approximately $7.9 million in combined State grant and City funding remains available.
We should not lose the opportunity to put those funds to work.
At the same time, I want to emphasize an important condition: **Seaside Lagoon and the surrounding public park space must remain public.**
I support responsible revenue-generating activities that help pay for maintenance and operations. However, there is a very important difference between generating revenue to sustain a public facility and allowing public park space to become increasingly privatized.
Any future concessions, special events, rentals, or public-private partnerships should be structured so that they do not restrict the public's ability to enjoy this waterfront resource. Public access should remain the priority—not maximizing private revenue.
I also believe the City should preserve the flexibility to pursue additional funding for future improvements rather than allowing the current Phase 1 project to become the end of the conversation. The Harbor Commission has raised important issues regarding the long-term vision for the Lagoon, including additional amenities, year-round activation, sea-level rise, and the State grant.
Let's invest in Seaside Lagoon today while protecting its public purpose for generations of Redondo Beach residents.
Thank you.
R. P. Tucker
Location:
Submitted At: 9:35am 09-15-26
Move forward with the plan as is. The current recreational uses should not become a secondary use.
Lezlie Campeggi
Location:
Submitted At: 11:00pm 09-14-26
The Seaside Lagoon is a Regional State Park in the Coastal Zone. As such, it must conform to Measure C, our LCP, and pass scrutiny with the California Coastal Commission for any development. The $10 million State grant received for the Lagoon is for rehabilitation, not re-purposing. Phase I of the King Harbor Amenities Plan was crafted over several years, with public and stakeholder input. It's time to move forward with that progress to enhance the Lagoon, eliminate annual water discharge fines, and open the park to public use for the 9 months of the year it's not functioning as a summer water recreation feature.
I hope you'll convey to the public what many don't seem to understand. The Seaside Lagoon is not an underutilized, City of Redondo Beach asset, destined to be a Towne Center economic revenue driver for the Harbor. Again, it's a Regional State Park in the Coastal Zone with strict requirements to be low-cost amenity for ALL of the public, not just Redondo Beach residents.
If there have been recent suggestions for slight changes the Council agrees with that can be easily incorporated into the Phase I design, by all means, please work those into the process of finalizing the detail necessary to submit an application to the California Coastal Commission for a development permit for the Seaside Lagoon.
Regarding the competing wave pool plan and presentation the Harbor Commission hosted last night, if you watched it, you realize there was no depth, data, analysis, etc. to consider. It was a colossal waste of time to entertain what was purported to be a "I just want to help vision" that is a disingenuous Trojan Horse. The only entity that would benefit from a delay of Phase I is the presenter of the wave pool plan. The public deserves much better; deserves to finally have this precious, low-cost coastal park available for enjoyment as a water recreation venue in the summer months, and as a public park for the other 9 months of the year.
Greg Byers
Location:
Submitted At: 9:31pm 09-14-26
I am in favor of the open space Phase 1 plan for the Seaside Lagoon. I believe that monies from the state blended with any private investor who expects a shared profit and to modify and delay the current plan will only bring a tough future of uncertainty for the city and the future of the Lagoon. Keep open spaces open for all. christina larsson
Location:
Submitted At: 9:21pm 09-14-26
PUBLIC PARKLAND—NOT A PRIVATE PLAYGROUND
Move the publicly approved Phase 1 Seaside Lagoon project forward while addressing needed changes. Keep this public parkland accessible and affordable for everyone.
Scott Bradley
Location:
Submitted At: 8:26pm 09-14-26
I support approval of the final preparation and submittal of Phase1 of the coastal development permit application to the California Coastal Commission for the Seaside Lagoon rehabilitation project at 200 Portofino Way.
The assertion that significant traffic could be driven to the waterfront by a wave pool in the offseason is unsupported and speculative. If traffic in the offseason to the waterfront is a concern, then non-swimming amenities like the reopening of the Fun Factory space and improvements to fishing amenities will have much higher probability of driving traffic to the waterfront. It makes no sense to base offseason increases in traffic to the pier area on swimming amenities when those are available in droves both with the beaches and with a large number of heated municipal pools that don't get traffic in the offseason. The existing plans by the city to allow for use of Seaside Lagoon land as a park like Veteran's Park in the offseason will provide for predictable use in the offseason, and even more so something like a dog park would likely be more popular than a dubiously popular and feasible attraction like a wave pool.
Steve Randall
Location:
Submitted At: 11:25am 09-14-26
Please move forward with Phase I, even if you need a little more time to refine some of the details. Please stop this nonsense of yet another predatory developer trying to takeover public parkland. Who in their right minds reduces park space for an amenity the majority of the public can't afford? The Lagoon is for all of the public, not just Redondo Beach, and not for an expensive, privatized recreational venue that swallows up the majority of the space. It would be reckless and downright disrespectful to start all over again, with years of fending off the wave pool people and more who selfishly want to turn our park into something it has never intended to be. I am all for the enhancement of the Lagoon and really excited about it being open year round for free for all to enjoy! Jill Klausen
Location:
Submitted At: 11:22am 09-14-26
I SUPPORT APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL OF PHASE 1 OF THE COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION FOR THE SEASIDE LAGOON REHABILITATION PROJECT AT 200 PORTOFINO WAY.
I am deeply opposed to consideration of turning over public land to for-profit developer Alan Sanford to create an unneeded wave pool that will only be accessible to wealthy people who can afford the $100-200 hourly cost while shrinking the available space that families can enjoy for their $10 entry fee. This would be a grotesque abuse of public resources at best, and at worst would cost us the remainder of the $10 million state grant given to Redondo Beach for Phase 1 of the lagoon improvement project.
It's long past time to stop the corrupt corporate takeover of Redondo Beach before we lose everything that makes us a beloved destination for the whole of Los Angeles to enjoy.
Jill Klausen
Redondo Beach resident since 1994
Laura Kastner
Location:
Submitted At: 11:13am 09-14-26
I strongly SUPPORT Item N.1 and urge the City Council to approve the final preparation and submission of the Coastal Development Permit application and the environmental exemption for the Seaside Lagoon Rehabilitation Project without delay.
This publicly vetted project is ready to move forward and protects crucial state grant funding. Please do not pause, redesign, or jeopardize it to accommodate a last-minute private wave-pool proposal that would consume a substantial portion of this treasured public space and fundamentally change its purpose.
Move Phase 1 forward exactly as planned. Keep Seaside Lagoon public, affordable, and centered on families and community use—not private commercial expansion.