COULD TERRY WATT PROVIDE A PATH TO WIN-WIN SOLUTION OF LOS CERRITOS WETLANDS DILEMMA?
By Dave Wielenga
The few open spaces that remain in Long Beach continue to dangle in the political breeze like piñatas, their fate frequently seeming to depend on nothing more than the blind swing of a lucky land developer.
During the past few years, the biggest of these places—the 56-acre, so-called Sports Park site on former oil and industrial land in the center of the city, and the 30-some-acre Los Cerritos Wetlands on the east side—have been offered and withdrawn, in whole or in part, during secret and public negotiations, with some of the best-connected, highest-rollers in town.
The city has suddenly tossed out its 20-years-in-the-planning Sports Park blueprints and it has acquired—although not legally protected—a piece of the Los Cerritos Wetlands in exchange for its public-service yard. Meanwhile, developers and city planners alike continue to eye another slice of wetlands for a road that would provide traffic mitigation for development at the intersection of Second Street and Pacific Coast Highway.
And then there is contractor Sean Hitchcock, who in the spring of 2009 simply rolled his own heavy equipment and some city-owned asphalt unannounced onto a corner of the wetlands at Loynes Drive and Studebaker Road and began to install soccer fields.
Into this undisciplined situation comes Terry Watt—well, at least for an evening. The renowned land use planner and environmental mediator is speaking Thursday night at 7 p.m. at a special open meeting of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust in the auditorium of Kettering Elementary School.
During the past five years, Watt has made her name synonymous with implementing order and extracting solutions from exactly the kind of mess that Long Beach has made.
And it is a mess.
“I’ve been reading up on this one,” Watt said Wednesday morning during a short telephone conversation with Greater Long Beach. “It’s so gnarly.”
But so were circumstances near Lake Tahoe, at the Tejon Ranch and in Orange County, where Watt helped bring together unlikely partners to protect some of California’s most fragile, threatened lands:
+++In 2005, Watt negotiated $243.5 million in an Orange County transportation measure to comprehensively mitigate for habitat impacts due to freeway projects with impressive environmental non-profit support.
+++In 2006, Watt helped secure protections for Martis Valley (Waddle Ranch), near Lake Tahoe, and create the Martis Fund—a non-profit funded through real estate and development transfer fees.
+++In 2007, Watt worked with the County of Marin to craft one of the nation’s most ambitious local plans to fight global warming.
+++In 2008, Watt was one of the Planning and Conservation League’s (PCL) representatives helping to preserve 240,000 acres of the magnificent Tejon Ranch.
After that last one, the not-for-profit PCL presented Watt with its Award for Individual Achievement, describing her work as “innovative, inspiring, and resourceful.”
Asked how she might apply those characteristics to local activists’ long battle to preserve the Los Cerritos Wetland, Watt said she was still sketching out some potential game plans for her Thursday-evening presentation at Kettering School.
“The question is, how do you step back and think creatively about a vision—a different vision than this continuous land grab by inappropriate development?” Watt offered. “I’m impressed by the work that local environmentalists have done. The question is, what do you do with all that work to get some traction and dialogue to turn this thing toward a permanent solution?”
Although Watt The answer, Watt said, is finding common ground—or the beginnings of a path toward it.
“We need a toehold on a bigger vision that’s shared with the other side,” she said. “How to do that? Although there are several replicable steps from work I’ve already done, it’s also true that each situation is unique—the players are always different. Right now, I’m trying to think about where the current setting looks primed for a breakthrough.”
[ FOLLOW-UP COVERAGE TO COME ]
TERRY WATT ADDRESS PRESENTED BY LOS CERRITOS WETLANDS LAND TRUST • KETTERING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL • 550 SILVERA AVE • LONG BEACH 90803 • LCWLANDTRUST.ORG • 7PM THURSDAY • FREE
















10 Comments
At the bottom of the story, the final words are “TONIGHT . FREE.
Although the date is presented correctly several other places, I just
want to be sure people know that Terry Watt will be speaking Thursday
evening, not Wednesday.
It doesn’t need moderation; it’s just a correction.
Hi Pat…Sorry for the brain fade. I posted the story and was out for the day.
who’s vw thing is that in the photo? always wanted one of those.
I attended the Kettering meeting featuring Terry Watt. This was after receiving various mailings and reading the ads.$$. My wife and I were completely underwhelmed. Granted, she is an good speaker.
But why was the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust doing this big promotion on her? We felt that she was uninformed regarding east Long Beach and the wetlands; perhaps homework or better prepping from the Land Trust was in order. She said she thought another Land Swap was in order.Obviously she doesn’t know how badly the wetlands fared on the former land swap! Also, she said she had seen 5 areas in the wetland area that could be developed??
We were bewildered and rather insulted by her primer handed out at the door, “Compromise and Negotiations 101″
Live and learn
I attended the meeting and heard no ground breaking tactic that “would save the mess” in LB. Tejon was mostly the topic. Knowing all about Tejon I don’t see how it relates here really. The Tejon deal was criticized by many, at a minimum for it’s secrecy cutting out both locals who the project affected and other groups who worked hard on the “Save Tejon Ranch” effort. Tejon was not subject to the California Coastal Act. Our wetands are. Tejon had 270,000 acres to “play” with. Our wetlands have less than 700 acres–hardly enough to make any deal to let them develop some in exchange for land not yet acquired. Those are some big differences. We have fewer land owners in our situation–Tejon is a public trading company and the land is subdivided or subleased out (the number here is said to be around 1000 subleases), difficult acquisition. Most of the wetlands South of 2nd/Westminster have been acquired; although the land swap lies in the hands of the city and then you have the Bryant retained parcel. To the North you have Dean and Hitchcock owning the land. I’m very curious as to what kind of “talk” with these guys would be suggested and what exactly (in detail) we think we have to bargain with in terms of letting them develop some of it? With LB already built out it would be difficult to suggest development elsewhere, that is our problem in LB. Should anyone decide to start this Tejon style “negotiations” would our community who is affected be included or have any say so in the matter? Regardless, remember we have the Coastal Act here and in many cases the right to appeal to coastal. Things don’t work the same as in Tejon in these parts. And remember, in many cases as for development around the wetlands the community is concerned with other issues created by the development, not necessary just the wetlands. Of course this was simply a guest speaker, yes she spoke well and seems to be a knowledgeable nice person with innovative ideas that did save a biological hotspot (Tejon)…at least the majority of it, development deal or no deal it was a gamble with Tejon either way, whole thing could have been lost. But I don’t think we have that same situation in Long Beach…
Doing a few google searches, the Tejon developments were anything but good. Wrong place to build, right on top of the intersection of the two biggest fault lines in California. Not the best place for dense population. Because the development is right on top of these two largest fault lines, potential for loss of life…and who would pay for the disaster relief? It was said the land outside of the two planned developments are not developable…and that was what was preserved by allowing the development? So what did the Save Tejon effort save then? Seems like the developers just got exactly what they wanted. Always more development, isn’t California crowded enough?
Interesting comments.
Many citizens are concerned about LC wetlands and over development on the east side. Education is important to protect these wetlands and prevent urban sprawl, but calling in a negotiator is not!
Bottom line-a corporate negotiator works both sides and the financial winner is usually the negotiator. If the LCWLT’s intention is to hire Ms. Watt, one should ask why? Cutting deals behind the membership’s back
as well as the community is a very slippery slope indeed. One entity cannot speak for an entire community nor should they.
REMEMBER the Los Cerritos Wetlands lie in the Coastal Zone; they are protected by the Coastal Act, SEADIP, the Long Beach LCP (Local Coastal Plan) and we have redress to the California Coastal Commission,(i.e.Shopkeeper Rd and the Hitchcock fiasco). The JPA has also done an awesome job acquiring wetlands with little state money to work with. We have a lot working for us…. AND open transparent discourse can and has worked in the past and I would certainly encourage it.
Ms. Watt, I’m looking to develop, maybe on a liquification zone or unstable landfill ground someplace around the wetlands. But these pesky environmentalists won’t have it. I think you can help, after all they think your great. We can offer to perhaps pay a few $$$ toward purchase of that piece of land at Shopkeeper and 2nd (now in the hands of the city) for “preservation” leaving the other unacquired “wetlands” parcels up for grabs for possible future negotiotions (wink, wink). They won’t even get it until we’ve finished. Poor development locations but we make a ton of cash anyway. Win-win!!!
So, the Tejon conservation deal negotiatiors were big on listening to the scientists? Isn’t that what was stated in that meeting? Then what is this?
May 25, 2008 – The Associated Press broke the story of Tejon’s silencing of their retained scientists through nondisclosure agreements.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/25/1511282-business-gets-condor-experts-silence-in-land-deal
June 7, 2008 – Eleven eminent condor scientists wrote to Governor Schwarzenegger and other public officials, voicing their opposition to the conservation agreement. Their letter is entitled “Tejon Ranch Conservation Agreement: A Tragedy for Condors.” http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/save_tejon_ranch/pdfs/Tejon_Ranch_a_Tragedy_for_Condors.pdf