November 2009 Archives

Los Cerritos Wetkabds Land Trust leaders have endorsed Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske's nomination to the state Coastal Commission.

Schipske -- considered by supporters as a strong environmentalists -- is one of a dozen nominees being considered for the commission's South District seat.

Supervisor Don Knabe's nomination list also includes Rancho Palos Verdes Councilman Doug Stern, Rolling Hills Estates Mayor Judy Mitchell, Manhattan Beach Councilman Richard Montgomery, Malibu City Councilman John Sibert, Santa Monica Mayor Pro Tem Pam O'Connor and Santa Monica Councilman Richard Bloom.

 Orange County, part of the Coastal Commission's South Coast district, has nominated John M.W. Moorlach and Bill Campbell, of the second and third districts, respectively.

Rancho Palos Verdes Councilman Larry Clark had been South Coast representative, but he decided not to seek re-election to the council.

 
The selection process has traditionally sparked heavy lobbying by both environmental groups and developers.

The attorney for Los Cerritos Wetlands owner Tom Dean has notified the city that escrow on a land-swap deal for 37 acres needs to be closed by Dec. 31.

In two letters to the city, attorney Kenneth  A. Ehrlich assesrts that the issues of contaminations at the wetlands are being addressed in good faith.

However, City Manager Patrick West said on Tuesday that the city will not enter escrow until after Tuesday's closed-door session on the land-swap deal.

And Councilwoman Gerrie Schiipske said the escrow process should not be completed while the Environmental Protection Agency completes its assessment of the contamination problems at the wetlands. 

Surfrider Foundation's Long Beach chapter will give an update on recent Breakwater news and buy the first round of pizzas.

The December meeting will be Dec. 7 at 7 p.m. at Ecco's Pizza, 2123 N Bellflower Blvd.

 The chapter also needs volunteers to help with itsr webpage.

Specific tasks include: upgrading the Mambo CMS, installing a new calendar system, adding new page with action alert/petition capability and minor trouble-shooting tasks

If you  can help, contact Emiko Innes, chapter chair, at xtremesun@yahoo.com.

One hundred trees will be added to downtown Long Beach area Saturday.

Councilman Robert Garcia will join the Downtown Long Beach Associates and the Redevelopment Agency for the tree planting.

 Volunteers will check in at 8:30 a.m. on the Promenade north of Broadway.
Coffee, juice and donuts will be provided.

For more details, call Lena Gonzalez at (562) 570-6919 or email her at lena.gonzalez@longbeach.gov.

The list of nominees for the state Coastal Commission's South Coast region representative seat has grown to an even dozen.

Last week, County Supervisor Don Knabe's nomination list of city officials for a vacated state Coastal Commission seat grew from five to eight. And four names from Orange County officials were tossed into the hat.

 Long Beach Councilwomen Gerrie Schipske and Suja Lowenthal are on the original list that will be submitted to the state Senate Rules Committee for selection.

 Knabe's original nomination list also included Rancho Palos Verdes Councilman Doug Stern, Rolling Hills Estates Mayor Judy Mitchell and Manhattan Beach Councilman Richard Montgomery.

Added to the list were Malibu City Councilman John Sibert, Santa Monica Mayor Pro Tem Pam O'Connor and Santa Monica Councilman Richard Bloom.

Orange County, part of the state Coastal Commission's South Coast district, has nominated John M.W. Moorlach and Bill Campbell, of the second and third districts, respectively.

 Two mayors in Orange County are also contenders -- Huntington Beach Mayor Keith Bohr and Laguna Beach Mayor Kelly Boyd

The state Senate Rules Committee is seeking to fill the seat of termed-out Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor Larry Clark.

The county's committee bypassed Seal Beach Mayor Gordon Shanks' application.

Previous Orange County officials to serve as the South Coast region representative include Shirley Dettloff of and Linda Moulton-Patterson, both of Huntingtion Beach and both with strong environmental credentials.

Los Angeles cities could added to the nominee list in January.

<CF12>Recovery Cam??!!

The Huntington Beach restoration project can be seen nline through time lapse photography, as  workers restore 41 acres of wetland and reconnect it with the open ocean.

 The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration installed a camera at the site in early October and the camera's images are now live online. See restoration in living color by going to: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration/webcam.html.

NOAA granted $3.3 million to the project that provides green jobs while restoring habitat for a range of fish, birds and other wildlife.

 
The restoration project is one of 50 NOAA habitat restoration projects across the nation that are receiving funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. At the website, you can also see restoration work unfold on the shores of Lake Michigan and on a coastal river in New Hampshire.

A major environmental project to help 16 cities capture tons of trash before it enters the Los Angeles River moved forward this week when a regional authority awarded a $5 million contract funded with federal Stimulus monies.

The contract will fund the installation of about 12,000 trash-collection devices known as catch basin inserts into storm drains that lead to the L.A. River in Long Beach and throughout all of the other 15 cities upriver.

The contract was awarded by the L.A. Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Authority (L.A. Gateway Authority), according to City Hall spokesman Ed Kamlan.

The inserts will prevent an estimated 400 tons of trash, green waste and other debris from entering the storm drain system annually, ultimately migrating to the Long Beach coast.

"For many years, our beaches and coastal water quality have suffered," said Mayor Bob Foster. "This project will help reduce the amount of trash that ends up on the Long Beach shoreline. I look forward to the swift implementation of this project."

Another $4 million will be available for cities to install curb-level screens to prevent debris from entering storm drains, and also enable the debris to be collected by street-sweeping equipment, Kamlan said.

 The year-long project could start Nov. 30 and create approximately 200 jobs, the spokesman added.

In an average year, according to Kamlan, Long Beach picks up more than 3,000 tons of trash and debris deposited on its beaches by the L.A. River.

 The cities that will receive the catch basin inserts are: Bell, Bell Gardens, Commerce, Compton, Cudahy, Downey, Huntington Park, Long Beach, Lynwood, Maywood, Montebello, Paramount, Pico Rivera, Signal Hill, South Gate and Vernon.

The Long Beach City Council on Tuesday will review possible liability problems the city could face if contaminants are found in Los Cerritos wetlands acreage involved in a land-swap deal.

In October, 5th District councilwoman won unanimous council vote to review the Environmental Protection Agency's findings on a study of possible hazardous substances, polychlorinated hydrocarbons, or PCBs, on the property owned by Tom Dean and his LCW, LLC.
The findings are still being processed, but an EPA attorney will explain potential clean-up liability issues, according to Robert Wise, an EPA on-sceme coordinator.

The EPA has put 12 sites on the wetlands under examination by monitors, and should be completed in about two weeks, Wise said.

According to the council agenda item, Wise will discuss the status of the investigation into contamination from PCB's on the property being considered for acquisition

The Bolsa Chica Land Trust on Thursday announced that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has approved a $77,233.00 grant to help implement the restoration for the Bolsa Chica wetlands mesa.

 The grant to implement the Community Promoted Restoration will be administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.

This funding will be used for a nursery designed to produce more than 60,000 plants to restore the Mesa to multiple native plant habitats during the 10-year CPR period for the project.

 Assisting in the design, building and installation of the nursery will be the faculty and students of Golden West College's Environmental Studies Program. The creation of the nursery is due to begin in 2010.

 For more information on this and other projects and issues at Bolsa Chica go to its Web site at www.BolsaChicaLandTrust.org or call 714.846-1001.

EPA's recent letter to the Long Beach City Attorney's  office is worth reviewing, as the agency prepares to release its examination of potential contaminations at Los Cerritos wetlands. The text follows:

Richard Anthony
Office of the City Attorney

Re: Reasonable Care Requirements, LCW Oil Operations, LLC Bixby "A" Site, 6433 East Second Street, Long Beach, California

I am writing in response to your inquiry concerning bona fide purchaser protection ("BFPP"), as defined in Section 101(40) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 D.S.C. §9601(40), in regard to the property referenced above. As you know, the D.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX ("EPA"), is assessing the property as the LCW Oil Operations, LLC Bixby "A" Site (the "Site"). EPA understands that your interest in the Site is a 33-acre parcel of generally undeveloped land that is adjacent to potential wetlands. The assessment to determine the nature and extent of contamination at the Site may support a determination that additional response work may be required. At present, EPA is working with the current owner of the property, LCW Partners, LLC ("LCW"), and has provided notice of potential liability to several other parties that may have generated or disposed of hazardous substances at the Site.

Currently EPA is overseeing the generation of a detailed work plan for LCW to implement a complete assessment of the Site. EPA anticipates continued work with LCW and other potentially liable parties to ensure an appropriate response to any hazardous substances at the Site that pose a substantial threat to the public health and welfare, and the environment.

The BFPP provision states that a person that acquires property after January 11, 2002, and that otherwise meets the criteria of 42 D.S.C. §9601(40) is protected from CERCLA liability. To qualify as a bona fide prospective purchaser, a person must (among other requirements) take "reasonable steps" with respect to stopping continuing releases, preventing threatened future releases, and preventing or limiting human, environmental or natural resources exposure to earlier releases. You have inquired as to what actions should be taken by an owner of the Site to satisfy the "reasonable steps" criterion.

EPA's assessment of the site may identify a number of environmental concerns that pose a substantial threat of a release of hazardous substances from the Site. Based on the information that EPA has evaluated to date, EPA believes that the actions stated below may comprise appropriate reasonable steps to mitigate exposures to hazardous substances at the Site and meet that requirement to support BFPP status for a new owner of the Site. The reasonable steps that EPA suggests include:

- Provide access for all assessment and response activities of EPA, LCW or other parties liable for the potential PCB contamination at the Site, and for natural resource trustees;

- Not exacerbate potential contamination conditions by undertaking earth movement or disposing of other waste materials at the Site without consulting with state or federal environmental agencies, including EPA through the course of its assessment and potential response at the Site; and

- Perform reasonable and diligent actions as may be required to maintain the efficacy of any indemnification provided by LCW among the terms of any land transfer.

This letter does not provide a release from CERCLA liability, but only provides information with respect to reasonable steps based on the information EPA has available to it.
This letter is based on the nature and extent of contamination known to EPA at this time. If
additional information regarding the nature and extent of hazardous substance contamination at the Site becomes available, additional actions may be necessary to satisfy the reasonable steps criterion. An owner must be aware of the condition of his property so that the owner is able to take reasonable steps with respect to any hazardous substance contamination at or on the Site. In particular, if new areas of contamination are identified, a bona fide purchaser must ensure that reasonable steps are undertaken to prevent or limit exposure.

For more information on reasonable steps, see the EPA document titled "Interim Guidance Regarding Criteria Landowners Must Meet in Order to Qualify for Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser, Contiguous Property Owner, or Innocent Landowner Limitations on CERCLA Liability" (also known as the "Common Elements Guidance") March 6,2003. The full text of this guidance can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/cleanup/ superfund/common-elemguide.pdf.

Please note that the bona fide purchaser provision has a number of conditions in addition to the "reasonable steps." Taking reasonable steps and many of the other conditions are continuing obligations of the bona fide prospective purchaser. You may need to assess whether you satisfy each of the statutory conditions for the bona fide prospective purchaser provision and continue to meet the applicable conditions. Additionally, despite the bona fide purchaser protection, EPA may have a "windfall lien" on the property pursuant to Section 107(r) of CERCLA, 42 D.S.C. §9607(r), to the extent that EPA's response action increases the fair market value of the property. The windfall lien is limited to the increase in fair market value attributable to EPA's response action, up to the sum of EPA's unrecovered response costs. EPA currently has no information to suggest that EPA's actions have increased the value ofthe Site to support perfecting a windfall lien. The anticipated performance of the assessment and necessary response by liable parties should, nonetheless, significantly reduce any EPA costs that otherwise could be secured by perfecting a windfall lien.

EPA hopes that this letter is useful to you. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please feel fee to contact me.

 Daniel A. Meer,
Assistant Director
Response, Planning and Assessment Branch
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9

Long Beach has been ranked No. 3 out of 10 featured cities for having the most urban gardens per capita, according to the Trust for Public Land.

Long Beach was among other U.S. cities including Seattle (No. 1), Portland, St. Paul, Honolulu, San Jose, Baltimore, Washington, DC, Anchorage and Louisville.

Nine urban gardens are located throughout Long Beach, where neighbors produce fresh fruit, vegetables and herbs, while satisfying their green thumbs.

Three community gardens established in Long Beach this past year are:

-- The Wrigley Village Garden, 2044 Pacific Ave. Long Beach Organic, a non-profit organization, has turned this once vacant lot into a thriving community garden space. The garden grows anything from sugar cane and lemongrass to sunflowers and tomatoes.

-- The Long Beach Community Action Demonstration Garden, Long Beach Boulevard and Spring Street. The non-profit Long Beach Community Action Partnership created the garden to show how edible gardening can save money, bring physical and mental wellness, and create a sense of community.

-- The Civic Center Edible Garden Project, located within the courtyard of Long Beach Civic Center, was built with sustainable and organic practices.

 "Urban gardening is ideal for Long Beach residents who live in apartments, condos or houses without a yard, or anyone who wants to increase their physical and mental well being, develop fresh and healthy eating habits, and reduce their weekly grocery bill by growing your own vegetables," said Larry Rich, sustainability coordinator.

 For more information on urban gardening resources, visit www.sustainablelb.com

Former Long Beach Deputy Prosecutor John Fentis made comments to the LBPost regarding the lack of action by the Prosecutor's Office on the controversial grading at the Los Cerritos wetlands buffer in March. Prosecutor Tom Reeves was asked for a response. And Fentis was asked to respond. Reese declined additional comment. The following are the texts:

FENTIS: "As a former prosecutor for the City of Long Beach, I can state, without hesitation, that there should have been a misdemeanor prosecution for grading without a permit. Virtually any violation of the Long Beach Muncipal Code can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor under Section 1.31 of the Code. I should know as I prosecuted dozens of Code Enforcement cases during my nearly 25 years in the office.

"Another example of no enforcement under politically motivated circumstances. I could really get into a discussion about a lack of environmental enforcement by the City of Long Beach, but I'm sure the response would be "there's no money in the budget"....the truth is that there is no commitment to ensuring environmental compliance for the benefit of the citizens by the Long Beach City Prosecutor's Office....there hasn't been for 4 years now and there won't be until you, the citizens, elect a prosecutor who is environmentally sensitive "

Dear Mr. Reeves:
John Fentis made the (above) comments to the LBPost regarding the Sean Hitchcock grading of the buffer area at Los Cerritos Wetlands.
Any response?

Dear Mr. Segura:
I don't believe my opinion of Mr. Fentis's opinion has any news value.
Tom Reeves

Dear Mr. Reeves:
Can you explain why your office has not taken action against Sean Hitchcock's grading (without a permit) of the buffer area at Los Cerritos wetlands?

REEVES: "If a grading permit was required, as your question assumes, the city department or state agency responsible for issuing permits would determine what steps to take. A subject matter expert in that department would determine if a grading permit and or other permit is required. If a permit was required, it is not uncommon for the department to seek compliance without referring the matter for prosecution. If the department does not get cooperation and or compliance, it may decide to submit a request prosecution or to pursue an administrative process.

"To present a criminal case, the department would have to make an initial determination of which laws were violated, gather the facts, assemble the documents, identify witnesses, conduct interviews and assemble and present this investigation to our office. This office does not file criminal cases based on third person accounts from newspapers, web-blogs or web reports.

"No request for criminal prosecution with an accompanying investigation has been submitted to this office and the statute of limitations has not run on potential offenses. However, without pre-judging a filing decision, our office would have to consider the following circumstances in making a filing decision: the potential defendant has already paid double the permit fees as a penalty, is fully cooperating in remediation, and will incur substantial additional expense to complete remediation.

FENTIS: "While Mr. Reeves is correct in alleging that it is the responsibility of the permitting department to refer the matter for prosecution (in this case Building & Safety), it is not unusual for the Prosecutor's Office to make inquiry as to whether a newsworthy case (which this was) is being investigated so that it may make preparations to receive the case for prosecution once it is referred. Additionally, for an office that makes news relative to Community Outreach in an effort to improve the quality of life for Long Beach citizens relative to slumlord structures and other code enforcement issues, I am somewhat surprised that the Prosecutor's Office did not make any inquiry here. To say that the potential defendant is paying double the penalty is ludicrous when you consider that a criminal fine for a misdemeanor violation carries with it a $500-1000 fine which is virtually tripled because of the California Penalty Assessment Law. It would also result in a potential conviction which might have an impact on the defendant's Contractor's license. Additionally, in this case, Sean Hitchcock is in the construction business and he should flat out know whether or not a permit is required. At the very least, he should ask. We are not talking about hand dug piles of dirt here. We are talking about the use of earth oving equipment which, more often that not, would at least trigger an inquiry on the part of a reasonable and prudent contractor as to the necessity of a grading permit. We don't know what remediation is being done and at what cost....

"There were several cases of a code enforcement nature that I handled during my tenure with Mr. Reeves where I was in communication with members of Building and Safety before the case was ever referred and with full knowledge on the part of Mr. Reeves. One involved the use of land as a container storage site without a permit having been issued where substantial grading had been done. I don't remember the name of the defendants, but I did file the case after several citizens complained about the number of semi-trucks entering and leaving the defendant's property. The Long Beach Municipal Code clearly states that construction work (including grading) requires a permit. That permit is obtained either through Building and Safety or the Planning Department. In this case, a member of the construction industry did a substantial amount of grading work without a permit. The pictures taken of these events speak for themselves. If you don't obtain a permit then, in my view, you are strictly liable for the consequences. This individual clearly and unequivocally ignored and disrespected the law. Had he tried to get a permit, he might have incurred further obstacles such as an EIR (environmental impact report) or other similar frustrations. While I understand the difficulty in trying to accomplish what he did without the burden of compliance with process, it is clear to me that he deliberately chose to engage in impermissible conduct without regard to consequence, thereby taking his chances. This is simply unacceptable if we are to apply code enforcement requirements in a fair and even-handed way. As for news value relative to my comments, I would invite Mr. Reeves to re-visit his debate relative to marijuana dispensaries and tell us how that is any more newsworthy than environmental compliance. If his answer is, yet again, to suggest a deferral of prosecution until a case is brought to the office, then I respond by saying that Fire and Health won't invest their resources to investigate matters of environmental violations because they know that their cases will not be prosecuted. All this comes from someone who, at least during my time in the office, demanded that his prosecutors engage in more proactive conduct by going out into the community for the purpose of discovering code enforcement violations."

REEVES: As I previously said, the speculation and opinions of Mr. Fentis are not news. My response is to decline the inviation to engage in a debate of opinions.

A key environmental attorney has cautiioned Long Beach planners that the proposed Second- PCH project needs to have a thorough environmental review.

Attorney Douglas P. Carstens, who successfully challenged a proposed Home Depot design center near Los Cerritos wetlands, said the environmental impact review requires public input -- hitting at complaint raised at a hearing that the review process had been ignored.

"We especially want to highlight the need for an adequate project description, opportunity for public comment, analysis of significant of adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives to the proposed project in the EIR."

Carstens asserts that the developer has submitted a formal application for planning permits, but no permits or entitlements have been filed.

The project description in the Notice of Preparation fails to "meet the legal requirements for an EIR," Carstens emphasized in his Oct. 29 letter.

Carstens sharpens his aim at an Oct. 7 city staff session, called a scoping meeting, as being inadequate:

"At the meeting, no effort was made to describe the project's elements, no testimony was taken, no recordings ere made and the city staff said nothing about the nature or purpose of the scoping process. Instead, the meeting consisted of responses to questions and statments from audience members, most of which merely indicated support or opposition to what they perceived the proposed project to be."

Environmentalists at the meeting also complained to a Press-Telegram reporter about the meeting being ended before many speakers could make statements.

The attorney advises the city staff to improve its format in future meetings.