THE CHERIN GROUP ACQUIRED BY ENGLANDER KNABE & ALLEN
By Dave Wielenga
The Cherin Group, a law firm founded in 2010 by former City Hall and Port of Long Beach official Alex Cherin, ostensibly to facilitate the attraction of green-technology firms to Long Beach, has been acquired by he public relations and lobbying firm of Englander Knabe & Allen.
According to an announcement from Englander Knabe & Allen, the acquisition of The Cherin Group is effective today, June 1. Cherin will serve as Senior Vice-President of EK&A and lead the firm’s clean-technology and transportation groups.
The press release continues:
“Alex comes to EK&A after building The Cherin Group over the last year and a half into one of the leading advocacy groups in Southern California catering to both emerging technology companies and a wide-array of private sector entities in the transportation, infrastructure and goods-movement fields. Prior to creating TCG, Alex served as both Executive Officer and Managing Director of the Port of Long Beach, the nation’s largest seaport complex, with more than $140 billion worth of goods moving through the Port each year, where he helped spearhead innovative policies such as the landmark Clean Trucks Program.
“During his tenure at the Port, Alex was responsible for advising the Board of Harbor Commissioners on all policy matters and was also tasked with leading the Port’s strategic initiatives surrounding trade practices and infrastructure projects. Mr. Cherin also served as the Assistant City Auditor for the City of Long Beach and practiced international and maritime law with the firm of Flynn, Delich & Wise for over a decade. He currently serves on many civic boards in and around the Southern California area including Children Today, where he is currently Board President.
“The acquisition of Alex and his practice is a milestone for EK&A—it allows us to grow our clean tech and transportation client base and helps us a fill a niche we feel will be important in policy matters facing California for the next decade,” said Harvey Englander, Managing Partner of EK&A.
“This transition allows me to grow my practice on a larger platform and in partnership with one of the most respected advocacy firms in the State,” said Alex Cherin. “I am gratified at the interest EK&A has shown in growing these particular areas and am privileged to be part of their growth.” Mr. Cherin received his B.A., with distinction, in both Political Science and Asian Studies from the University of Michigan and received his J.D. from Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. Mr. Cherin resides in Long Beach.”
21 Comments
One of Long Beach’s great citizens….EKA is truly lucky to have him. Sky’s the limit for Alex – congrats!
A stupid question with the caveat that there are no stupid questions just stupid uninformed people who ask questions:
Because the Cherin Group, a law firm, has been acquired by the public relations and lobbying firm of Englander Knabe & Allen will Mr. Cherin, now a Senior Vice-President at EK&A, be required by law to register as a lobbyist and comply with all lawful regulations regarding lobbyist in the City of Long Beach, County of Los Angeles and State of California?
Maybe, it is true that people can learn by asking questions.
Will EKA be advertising in Greater Long Beach to replace the prominent Cherin Group ad?
Alex Cherin represented the 12-story Second + PCH development. Can anyone tell me what is “green” about that hideous monolith? Oops, forgot. Its the money that is ostensibly green.
Hi Mike,
I understand why you would think large development projects aren’t green. But actually conventional thinking is that urban density is more green than the alternative. That is to say there’s a strong negative correlation between the total energy consumption of a city and its overall urban density (the lower the density, the more energy consumed).
I also don’t think the design of 2nd+PCH is monolithic. There is a one tall building in the entire project that appears to be less than 10% of the total building footprint. This contrasts with over 50% of the footprint which falls well below the current SEADIP limits. I think you’re right in your assessment about money though – the project probably can’t pencil without having the height in the condo building.
Alex is a great guy – more integrity and ethics than anyone I’ve ever known. And yes there are plenty of public affairs professionals with questionable ethics/interests. But Alex simply isn’t one of them. You should allow that others (very much like you) are motivated by making their community better and not driven by greed alone. That’s not to say Alex isn’t compensated by the developer….I’m sure he must be, but I know Alex wouldn’t be involved in something he doesn’t personally care about deeply.
Hi Josh: Can you please explain what you mean when you state, “this contrasts with over 50% of the footprint which falls well below the current SEADIP limits.”
Based on the cross section diagrams in the RDEIR depicting building heights, I’m not seeing how you arrived at your statement. Or did I misunderstand you? Thanks.
i will never use the term “advocacy firm” when referring to lobbyists.
Josh,
I suspect I don’t fit your conventional thinking because I believe there are many flaws in your argument that urban density is more green than the alternative. For instance, where does the food, water, energy, etc. come from to support the increased urban density? Those non-green support systems are currently insuffient for increased urban density and therefore must be constructed, expanded and maintained. Much of that non-green construction will occur in rural areas because there is no room for such systems in the urban density you describe.
Take China for example, a country that has seen a significant population shift from rural to urban areas. 20 years ago, there was nary a freeway system extending inland in China. That is no longer the case. A spiderweb of trains and freeways now connect China’s urban areas to the rural areas where the food is grown, the energy is produced and the water is purified. Does that make it greener?
Furthermore, what happens when there is a failure in one of the support systems that dense urban areas will rely upon? Backlogs of energy, food and especially water will be consumed in a matter of days upon failure of any one of those systems.
“One Second After” is a dooms-day book by William R. Forstchen. It is a fictional account of the failure of these support systems for urban areas. I recommend you read this book. Not because I believe in the sceneario painted by the book. I recommend it because I think it may provide you a different perspective and cause you to wonder how high urban density utopias will be supported and whether those support systems are actually “greener.”
Mike,
I’ll check out Forstchen….sounds like a good read. I see your perspective on support systems and I’ve been to China so I know exactly what you mean there. Building green is not an easy path as you note and it is tough to calculate the net effect of trade-offs, but urban density is certainly in the mainstream mix of green building for cutting down on energy usage….that is indisputable. I consider myself an environmentalist, supporter of the wetlands, and am in favor of this development. I respect your views and feel they are valid. By the way I also share the concerns you very appropriately convey in regards to entertainment venues on 2nd Street and feel that 2nd+PCH will alleviate the stress from those venues. Makes sense – less residential and tied to a hotel, etc.
Heather,
I think you can get in touch with Malmuth or Studio One Eleven (architects) for confirmation, but I clearly remember hearing that the building footprint has over 50% under 30 feet and that the condo building is actually is less than 10% of the building footprint. I don’t believe that includes additional ground-floor open space. Maybe I’ll ping the owner/developer/Alex and ask if they can put those numbers here on this thread.
Maybe Second+PCH could build a 24-story tower on half the footprint that the cute little 12-story bungalow is planned for. That should pencil out. Then they could say only 25% would be above current zoning. A 48-story California beach shack would reduce that figure to 12.5% for trumpeting purposes on Second+PCH press releases. A 96-story cabana takes it down to 6.25%. Where”s the leadership?
Josh, I remember when banning paper bags to preserve the forests was “mainstream.” It resulted in the plastic bag issues we have today.
I remember when addition of MTBE and alcohol to gasoline was mainstream with environmentalists. That is until they found out it reduced mileage and formed formaldahydes.
I remember when lead addition to paint and gasoline was mainstream until dire health effects were proven.
Whether something is indisputably mainstream doesn’t make it right.
There are a lot of people in the world who call themselves “Environmentalists” and who have little understanding of the science of following policies that are indisputably mainstream. I don’t mean to imply disrespect, because I don’t know anything about your background or technical expertise.
My personal past includes a Chemical Engineering Degree, among others, with an emphasis on Environmental Science. I was trained to solve problems and question issues not supported by science. Urban density is an interesting topic. There is a lot of literature on the subject and most advocate it. However, there is little in the way of science that I have found to answer the questions being asked.
All good points.
Sorry for the mistake in my earlier post. I was running Long Beach Bullshit Aggregator v3.0.5, which collects all the specious comments of Long Beach government officials, development executives and their respective entourages, and, for any proposed development, spits out what that development’s cabal would like to construct.
I accidentally had my users panel set to “Presentation Envisioned in Your Greedhead Owner’s Wet Dream” instead of “Presentation Actually Presented and Spoken Aloud in Public,” so it gave me those larger footprint figures. Those more lucrative figures, of course (as any hired gun “advocate” or not-yet-compensated friend of the development would tell you) may accurately represent cabal avarice but are not intended for public consumption.
When I change Long Beach Bullshit Aggregator v3.0.5′s settings to the “spoken out loud” protocol, and reset my cabal input parameters to accept statements from Josh Lowenthal and others like him with previous business connections to the property’s current owners, the 96-story option only occupies 1.25% of the Second+PCH footprint.
Long Beach Bullshit Aggregator v3.0.5’s “Talking Points Wizard” suggests that Josh can next say “That’s essentially no development whatsoever!!!” And if Josh is too busy, maybe Mr. Cherin can find some other well connected scion to carry the water for Second+PCH.
The most green use of the Seaport Marina is adaptive reuse.
2nd+PCH buildings may pencil out greener than suburban homes (whose residents commute distances to work) but only when they are built in an area with existing density and alternative modes of mobility which are used by those residents. The city’s existing Local Coastal Program and SEADIP were written with this exact idea in their plan. 2nd+PCH belongs downtown not in our neighborhood.
To build this kind of density next to protected wildlife habitats in the Los Cerritos Wetlands does not respect the environment and is out of context with the rest of our neighborhood. Creating traffic gridlock and congestion in our neighborhood is not green.
There is no need for either more retail or condos in Long Beach. The Marketplace is 40% empty, Best Buy and Loehmann’s exist only because of the City’s sales tax rebates. Walgreen’s is now out of business.
Encouraging consumption of cheap consumer goods or excess commercial or retail space is not green.
Don’t get me started on the shortcomings of LEEDs certification or SB375…..
A footnote. Is the Knabe of “Englander Knabe & Allen” related to anyone we know of in County government?
If Josh is right about the 10%/50% ratio then that would mean 16% of the building footprint is 400% out of compliance of the SEADIP height limit.
I didn’t know that Josh Lowenthal was an apologists for these developers without a conscience. I guess I should just follow the money. What a joke.
Hi Richard,
I take great offense to your comment. I do not have any financial interest in this project whatsoever. I don’t understand where the joke is. I respect others who may have a different vision of the City/community than I do (like you), and do not assume they are motivated by self-interest. I believe this will be a wonderful project, and it’s anyone’s guess today if I am ultimately right or wrong about that. However, that’s how I personally feel. In fact, there will be different opinions about whatever is built there, just as there are those that love 2nd Street and those that want changes, those that love Ocean Blvd and Downtown and those that stay away, those that appreciate the airport and others that wish it didn’t exist. But honestly, the City has bigger problems than development density questions when neighbors attack each other with vitrol simply for sharing their opinions. If you want to discuss my support for 2nd+PCH or to “follow the money” where I am actually employed, you can reach me at FreeConferenceCall.com, a Long Beach-based company. Thanks.
Hi Josh, don’t know ya, but curious how you think building all this new retail space is supposed to fill when all around there is so much vacant retail space. Also, how is this supposed to be “greener” when more cars gridlocked with exhaust is the non-debated outcome?
Just because someone is not being paid by a developer now doesn’t mean he won’t be paid later — that’s state of the art development practice. And just because someone has a previous business relationship with the property’s current owners — as Josh Lowenthal does — doesn’t mean he can’t be objective about this project. It just means you laugh out loud when he asks you to believe that.
Where did Josh go? Maybe he and Baktah are having a latte at the local coffee house.