Peter M. Warren,
CSPNC Port & Environment
Committee, chair.
Remember Peanuts, the comic strip with
Lucy and the football? Remember how she would pull the football away at the last minute
from Charlie Brown?
Well, welcome to Peanuts San-Pedro style with the Port of
Los Angeles as Lucy and the community as Charlie Brown.
It only took a few months for the Board of Harbor
Commissioners (BHC) to pull away the football after promising in October to
involve members of the community in all phases of the planning and design of
the San Pedro Waterfront.
The promise was made in their unanimous vote September 30th
when the Harbor Commissioners approved the San Pedro Waterfront Plan and its
Environmental Impact Report, passing a motion pledging to involve the community
directly in the planning process. The promise was made in front of 500 community members
who spoke passionately about the need for the waterfront improvements, with the
vast majority giving priority to waterfront development in and around the
downtown area.
Five months after the vote, the Port and the Board have
not created a plan for community input. Instead, they held one public meeting
in February. But sadly there has been no follow through by the Port on the BHC
pledge to “create a framework for public participation” by “identifying
appropriate stakeholders” to participate in project implementation, schedule
and design.”
At the February meeting, Port Director Geraldine Knatz did
answer questions. But neither she nor any of the Harbor Commissioners said how
the Port plans to carry out the BHC promise of stakeholder input. Knatz explained
that she just could not find time to work on the BHC promise of public
participation. Ominously, she indicated that some of the commissioners are no
longer interested in naming stakeholders to participate in planning our
waterfront.
To recap what happened in September last year, the BHC
unanimously approved the Waterfront Plan with two revisions to the staff plan.
- One
revision required that, should the cruise industry move into the Outer
Harbor, the first cruise ship berth would go in the East Channel. (The
staff preferred a berth facing Cabrillo Beach.)
- The
second directed Port staff to identify stakeholders to work on the
development and prioritization of the waterfront plan. It also told Port
staff to come up with a new, comprehensive redesign of the Inner Harbor
cruise terminal so it can function as the “Gateway to the San Pedro
Waterfront.”
The second motion, from BHC Chair Cindy Miscikowski, read:
Direct the staff to report back to the Board within 30
days with an implementation strategy for the Project. That strategy
should include protocols for guiding the Board in and the Port staff in
determining which projects go forward in which sequence. The protocols
should include analysis of the various financing mechanisms for moving forward
on both revenue generating and non-revenue generating projects. The
protocols should also include a framework for appropriate thresholds to
consider in the sequencing of each project.
Additionally, the protocols should also create a
framework for public participation in the Project implementation including
identifying appropriate stakeholders for the overall Project implementation as
well as stakeholders for specific elements within the Project. This
should include not only input on the implementation schedule of the
Project but input on design elements as well.
Further, the staff is asked to include a proposal for
more comprehensive design improvements for the Inner Harbor Cruise Terminal
recognizing its importance as the Gateway to the San Pedro Waterfront with
aesthetic and access improvements which befit its location and presence in the
Port of Los Angeles.
Of course, none of the public input has happened. This
very public pledge to craft “a framework for public participation” has not been
honored. Neither the Port nor the Harbor Commissioners treat us as customers
and clients. Instead, they see San Pedro as a cheering section for the Harbor
Commission and a platform for the Port’s development plans.
There are numerous public
entities full of people who can fulfill the role of “appropriate stakeholders”
to provide public input. There is the Port Community Advisory Committee, which
was created by the City Council specifically to advise the Harbor Commission on
community issues. The Coastal and Central Neighborhood Councils are sister
agencies to the Port under the City Charter. These two neighborhood councils,
where the project will be built, are also loaded with San Pedrans publicly
elected to represent the stakeholders
in these areas. Other nearby neighborhood councils might also be asked to weigh
in.
The Harbor Commissioners should honor the commitment they
made to San Pedro. They should do that or they should rescind their own motion.
Anything else is just Lucy playing football with the community.