Mailbag - June 20, 2002
“Surfhenge” -- what a waste of city money to try and please some
tourists. Our city should be spending money on schools, parks, fixing
rundown neighborhoods (and making them more friendly) and those who have
chosen to live here rather than wasting the people’s money on junk “art”
by a non-Huntington Beach (let alone Californian) artist. “Surfhenge,”as
the media (not the residents) call it, is an eyesore and an insult to the
city; it is nothing close to being one of Huntington’s new
“improvements.” This is Surf City, not Slab Art City.
SHAUNA COSTA
Huntington Beach
Danette Goulet’s Editor’s Notebook (“Surfhenge’ an unsightly waste of
money,” June 6) hits the nail squarely on the head. At least one person,
(Danette), with visibility in this city thinks with a clear head. I had
driven past “Surfhenge” several times and thought it was a pile of ruble
from the adjacent construction sites and was beginning to get upset that
that developers hadn’t disposed of it. To find out it is permanent and
cost in excess of $45,000 disgusts me.
The situation reminds me of the Nero and a burning Rome story. The
infrastructure is falling down around us and the City Council people idle
their time away by spending our money on ugly atrocities. And they spent
the money in another state to boot. They have more pressing things to
accomplish. The council might consider working on increasing revenue to
the city instead of squandering it. A suggestion would be to get the
vacant Huntington Center Mall up and generating sales tax revenue.
Oh, and another observation, perhaps some of the relevant art work
from the former Seacliff shopping center would have been a more
appropriate decoration for the Beach Boulevard/Pacfic Coast Highway
location, but then the costs wouldn’t have been as high. What are our
council members thinking?
RONALD VON FREYMANN
Huntington Beach
Hearthside Homes should work with Land Trust
Over the years, developer names at Bolsa Chica have changed. But the
intent is still the same -- to build as many houses as possible. That
doesn’t work anymore. Times have changed since Signal Bolsa purchased the
land at Bolsa Chica. Now, we have polluted waters, crowded streets,
leaking sewer pipes and little open space for our children. Now is the
time for this developer to realize that this community needs a nationally
recognized natural wetlands system that supports wildlife and a place to
enjoy it. Not more houses.
The Surfrider Foundation supports the Bolsa Chica Land Trust. The
Bolsa Chica Land Trust wants to work with the developer to help them get
their return on investment. The model of land trusts and developers
working together to find win/win solutions has worked well all over the
state. This developer and Land Trust cooperation will benefit all of
Huntington Beach.
BILL GREGORY
Huntington Beach
I disagree with those who say Hearthside Homes should be permitted to
develop the Bolsa Chica mesa (Mailbag, June 6).
Initially, the developer has stated that it hopes to build out the
entire mesa if it can overturn the November 2000 Coastal Commission
ruling, which excludes building on the lower mesa. In other words, the
current plan for the upper mesa may be only part of the picture.
Further, the developer refuses to exclude archeological site ORA-83
from its current building plan for the upper mesa. The Smithsonian has
stated that it believes this site is one of national significance.
United States Fish and Wildlife and other experts who have studied the
Bolsa Chica have concluded that the wetlands and the mesa are one
ecological unit. As such, paving over the mesa would negatively affect
the animal and plant life at the wetlands. We should do all we can to
ensure that the entire Bolsa Chica mesa is acquired from the owner at a
fair price and preserved for future generations.
PAUL HORGAN
Huntington Beach
Budget shortfall is due to past mistakes
I think if our city fathers and Planning Commission had played hard
ball with the owners and occupants of Huntington Center four years ago
they wouldn’t be looking at a shortfall of dollars. Having been a store
manager through the down time, and receiving many comments about what
could/should be built and questions about when we would be back (good
thing we didn’t make any promises,) it seems a shame that all those tax
dollars go to Westminster, Costa Mesa and Fountain Valley. Why?
ELEANOR GRAMS
Huntington Beach
Cross and cohort would ruin the city
Cindy Cross’ completely inflammatory article in the June 6 Independent
on the “fraud” of Councilman Ralph Bauer’s proposal is in itself a fraud
and an affront to all the residents of Huntington Beach. Wake up my
fellow residents. If Cindy Cross and her cohorts get their way on
citywide districting, this wonderful city will be plunged back into the
dark ages of “the good ol’ boys” running the place with no at-large
representation or access. Now we get seven council members, who we can
visit to air our views. If we district according to the plan being
espoused in the current circulating petition, we will get only one
council member. Does that sound democratic to you?
JUANA R. MUELLER
Huntington Beach
Five representatives not representative enough
If reducing the Huntington Beach City Council members to five will
make it more efficient, why not make it even better and reduce it to
three. Better yet, elect a mayor only. Think of the time and money saved
by developers and big business if they had only one person to influence.
Those who think five member districts are the answer for good
government should take a good look at the Orange County “Bored” of
Supervisors. If they represent a five-person good government, forget it.
TED DOWDING
Huntington Beach
Districting measure is what’s fair
The people of Huntington Beach and the proponents of the district
measure owe Mayor Debbie Cook and Councilwoman Connie Boardman a vote of
thanks. Cook, Boardman and Councilman Ralph Bauer, as a committee of
three to represent the best interest of southeast Huntington Beach, were
to evaluate the desires of those in the southeast area and finalize the
approval on how to best bring the blighted areas up to city standards.
The choice was between redevelopment or letting the situation exist as it
has for the last 40 years. During the council meeting, which included
this item on the agenda, residents from the southeast area addressed the
council to emphasize the need for action and redevelopment. The council
vote was 5 to 2. Cook and Boardman even went so far as trying to justify
their no votes. Yes, two members of the committee that were depended on
by residents of the southeast area to vote in their best interests were
the two dissenting votes. Surprised? You should not be. These two council
members were voted into office by the city at large but mainly by the
Bolsa Chica groups that are more interested in an area outside our city
limits than the causes within our city. Why should they care if they
incur the wrath of the residents in the southeast area? The Bolsa Chica
groups, with their political clout, will put them back in office. After
these two council members have demonstrated what happens when all council
members are voted into office at large, are you still undecided on the
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher and Scott Baugh-backed district measure,
Fair Apportionment and Individual Representation? I am not, to put it
simply; what’s fair is FAIR.
BOB POLKOW
Huntington Beach
Inlet would destroy the coastline
The June 6 Independent was very interesting. The letters written by
Charlene Bauer and Nancy Donaven explaining why council districts would
be bad for our city and our residents were excellent, as were the many
letters against any development of the Bolsa Chica Mesa. I also liked
Steve Bolton’s cartoon lampooning the ridiculous and expensive so-called
sculpture at Beach and Pacific Coast Highway.
The article that really caught my attention, though, was Danette
Goulet’s column questioning the wisdom of destroying a beautiful beach by
cutting a channel through to the wetlands. I see it as another assault
on our lovely coastline, in the same category as the hundreds of palm
trees planted on the beach and the bridge crossing the highway from the
new hotel, or the huge complex of apartments marring the beach between
6th and 9th streets. How can we reconcile ruining one of nature’s
loveliest features, possibly, to help another? Surely there is a less
invasive solution that would allow the wetlands to function in a
reasonable fashion without cutting a channel through the beach, and I
would urge the Coastal Commission to reconsider their approval.
I often go out of my way just to experience the almost ethereal
feeling I get from driving the stretch of Pacific Coast Highway between
Goldenwest Street and Warner Avenue, reveling in the openness with the
Bolsa Chica Mesa and wetlands on one side and the unbroken line of the
Pacific Ocean on the other. I hope we can keep it that way.
LOIS VACKAR
Huntington Beach
Goulet is wrong, the inlet is a good solution
I could not agree more with Danette Goulet’s position that we should
right the wrongs that humans have inflicted upon our environment, but
Goulet lacks perspective when it comes to the ocean inlet proposed for
the restoration of the Bolsa Chica wetlands. She disagrees with the
inlet’s planned location at the south end of Bolsa Chica State Beach, but
then doesn’t mind placing it at the north end. At least Goulet appears to
agree on the need for an ocean inlet; restoration is not feasible without
one.
Many years of analysis went into determining both the size and the
location of the inlet. The size is exactly what is needed to deliver the
volume of life-giving sea water needed to sustain the restored wetlands,
water that has been cut off for more than 100 years. Several potential
locations for the inlet were studied, including the historical one at
Warner Avenue. Contrary to Goulet’s assertion, the inlet will not destroy
the view nor the beach. Her hyperbole may make interesting reporting, but
does nothing to help readers understand the issues.
In a truly strange comparison, Goulet equates the restoration of the
Bolsa Chica wetlands with past destruction of the state’s wetlands. The
Southland has lost over 75% of its coastal wetlands to development, an
enormous environmental loss by anyone’s calculations, and with little if
any environmental benefits in return. In contrast, we will get back
nearly 1,000 acres of productive wetlands in the Bolsa Chica once
restoration is completed, representing one of the largest wetland gains
in California history. To me that is a reason to celebrate.
DAVID M. CARLBERG
Huntington Beach
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.