SHOULD NAPLES RESIDENTS PAY FOR SEAWALLS THAT SUPPORT THEIR LIFESTYLE?
By Jim McCabe
The meeting took place more than a decade ago at Naples Elementary School. Councilman Doug Drummond had summoned staffers from the appropriate city departments to meet with people who owned homes along the Naples canals. The seawalls along those canals were already showing their age, and the meeting was held to figure out how to finance their repair. As the Deputy City Attorney charged with handling Tidelands legal matters for Long Beach, I was there.
The homeowners were anxious to have the sea walls repaired. City staff suggested that the homeowners could expedite those repairs by helping with the cost through a modest increase in the fees they paid for their boat slips, which were situated over the City-owned canals.
Several weeks later, Drummond came back to City Hall with the message that the canal-front homeowners would not pay a dime towards the repair of their seawalls.
+++++++
The meeting took place on June 15, 2010, in the City Council chambers of Long Beach City Hall. Eight of the nine Council members were behind the rail, all but 2nd district representative Suja Lowenthal. There was a motion on the floor that would finally begin repair of the Naples sea walls—a small portion of them, anyway, the parts that were in the worst condition.
But the motion proposed taking $9.5 million out of the Citywide Tidelands Fund—money dedicated by law to the public benefit of all taxpayers—to pay for improvements that would benefit a relatively small number of private and wealthy homeowners in Naples.
As the retired Deputy City Attorney formerly charged with handling Tidelands legal matters, who had noticed this item on the Council agenda, I was there to voice my objection.
It was apparent then—and still is—that public money spent on Naples seawall repair would be money spent for the overwhelming benefit of private and narrow interests, not the good of the wider public.
Those seawalls keep luxury homes and their manicured gardens from falling onto the property owners’ private floating boat docks—which are attached to their portion of the sea walls—and then into the canals. The market value of those private homes are benefited to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars for each residence. The private homeowners get the benefit of a water view and backyard access to Alamitos Bay and the ocean for their private boats.
Any benefit of the seawalls to the public is minor by comparison. Outside of Naples residents, only a very small portion of the public actually go walking or boating along those canals. If it were up to the homeowners, Naples would be a gated community specifically excluding the public. That request has been made in the past.
But the only bump in the road to swift and overwhelming passage of the motion was an amendment moved by Council member Rae Gabelich. It would direct City Manager Pat West to look into and report to the Council what methods might be available for the private canal-side homeowners of Naples to contribute to the $9.5 million being paid for by everybody’s Citywide Tidelands Fund for their particular benefit.
Actually, one method had already come up at the meeting. While providing legal expertise in response to a council member’s question, City Attorney Robert Shannon asserted that the City of Long Beach could legally assess the Naples property owners for all or part of the money.
Gabelich then noted that the price Naples homeowners were paying for having their private docks on public water—basically, in their back yards—was about one-twelfth of what people were paying to rent less-desirable docks in the city marinas.
Before anybody dug much further into the inequitable bargains enjoyed by Naples homeowners, the Council approved Gabelich’s amendment—then the original motion, too.
+++++++
The filing of the California Public Records Act (CAPRA) request took place in January 2011 at Long Beach City Hall. It was with regard to Item 29 from the agenda of the City Council meeting on June 15, 2010. As the retired Deputy City Attorney formerly charged with handling Tidelands legal matters, who had been at that meeting (where the Council scooped $9.5 million out of the Citywide Tidelands Fund to pay for sea walls repair without asking Naples homeowners for a dime), and who had been at the meeting at Naples School a decade earlier (where those homeowners declared they would not pay a dime for repair of their sea walls), and who many years around City government gave him intuition about certain things, I was there to file that CAPRA request.
It asked for any documents or electronic messages from city staff reflecting on the Gabelich amendment that was approved by the City Council and which directed City Manager Pat West to provide a report to the City Council on funding alternatives, including a possible change in slip fee rates, for repair of seawalls in the Naples area.
When the City responded to my CAPRA request, it was to inform me that not even one slip of paper had been generated in response to the mandate of the Gabelich Amendment. Nothing had been done to identify funding alternatives. Just as the private property owners along the Naples canals declared more than a decade ago, they will still not pay a dime toward the repair of their seawalls.
+++++++
The $9.5 million that was taken from the Citywide Tidelands Fund to pay for Naples seawall repair was just a down payment on a partial fix, the initial installment of a seawall-repair bill that could soar beyond $50 million in the next few years.
How will that bill be paid? Well, past performance—that decade-old declaration by the Naples waterfront homeowners and the way the City Council has honored it—seems to have set a precedent for raiding the Citywide Tidelands Fund.
Citizens of Long Beach should ask themselves which is more important: $50 million for beaches, lifeguards, marinas and recreation for all our taxpayers or $50 million to be bestowed on private citizens living in an exclusive enclave.
There will be more meetings on the subject of sea walls repair. Who’s going to be there?
















48 Comments
In 2006, my Belmont Shore neighborhood set up a meeting with City Hall to discuss repairing the alleys behind our homes. We were told there currently are over 10 miles of Long Beach dirt alleys and it would be over 100 years before our alleys were to be re-paved because the city only paves one alley block per year. We were told the only way our alleys would be re-paved is if we formed an assessment district and all homeowners agreed to pay $5,000 in additional property tax.
Meanwhile, I watch the wealthiest portions of Long Beach repeatedly receive taxpayer paid-for benefits for free without being accessed a tax to pay for the improvements to their property. Rebuiding the Naples sea wall is just another example of this benefit for the wealthy elite. Other examples of taxpayers funds spent over the past 5-years for the benefit of the wealthy elite include the following:
1. Entire Peninsula boardwalk replaced.
2. All Peninsula sidewalks replaced (including the bayside) though there was nothing wrong with them.
3. Over $2.0 million spent EVERY YEAR moving sand to protect 200 Peninsula homes.
4. Handicap ramps installed at every peninsula corners.
5. 1000 feet of NEW sidewalk added to the Peninsula, previously not there before.
6. Repaving of a 4-lane dead end road that serves 350 peninsula residents. You won’t find a pot hole on the Peninsula or Naples Island.
7. Replacement of the Peninsula’s entire storm water drain system to prevent Peninsula flooding.
8. City lease of valuable oceanfront property on the Peninsula to exclusive (members only) Alamitos Yacht Club for $1 per year.
9. City lease of valuable oceanfront property on Naples Island to exclusive (members only) Naples Yacht Club for $1 per year.
10. Long Beach police blockade every 4th of July to prevent the general public from driving onto the Peninsula.
11. Construction of US Sailing Center on the Peninsula to benefit the weathy elite.
12. Recently approved reconstruction of the Peninsula Leeway Sailing Center (different from US Sailing Center) to benefit the wealthy elite.
13. $95 million construction started on Naples and Peninsula marinas to benefit the wealthy elite.
14. Replacement of Naples Island storm water lift pumps to prevent flooding of Naples.
These are an awful lot of SIGNIFICANT and COSTLY benefits bestowed upon Long Beach’s wealthy elite. Meanwhile, other areas of Long Beach still have dirt roads for alleys.
Let the walls to go tumblin’ down so Naples can return to the coastal wetland it once was.
It seems outrageous to me that a Council motion to determine what methods might be available for the private canal-side homeowners of Naples to contribute to the $9.5 million was approved but that no subsequent action was taken upon it or, at least, none that was documented and archived as a public record (as it rightly should have been.)
This is not the first story I have heard of city staff failing to follow up and complete work which the Council has directed them to complete.
That the direction to the City Manager was not fulfilled is bad enough, but where also was the follow up from Gabelich’s office (who made the motion) or DeLong’s office (in whose district Naples is located) or the Mayor’s office (who is charged with Council oversight)?
Did none of them have their own staff members follow up on that direction to make sure the City Manager completed the work?
If not, why not?
Should we not expect our elected Mayor and Councilmembers to properly supervise our appointed staff? Is that not a reasonable and important part of their responsibility to the electorate?
Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day — History Repeats Itself
Headline:
“POLITICAL MACHINE
FIGHTS FOR ITS LIFE”
Sub-headline:
“Recall Is A Taxpayer Warning To Politicians”
“WILL LONG BEACH CITY government be returned next Tuesday, or will it remain in the hands of a well-oiled (no pun intended) political machine headed by the daily monopoly newspaper?
“IF THE I-PT CANNOT SAVE Bert Bond, Paul Deats, Ted Cruchley and Russell Rubly from being recalled it will forfeit its “kingmaker” role.
“THE CITY HALL MACHINE is throwing all its guns and the kitchen sink into this effort to save four $200-a-month honorary jobs because there is more at stake than those jobs.
“IF THE VOTERS recall all or any of the four councilmen, it is hoped that they will be replaced by councilmen who do not owe their jobs to the daily newspaper.
“BEHIND THE RECALL are more than 30,000 aroused homeowners who have rebelled against the 5% utility tax, the Queen Mary scandal, the airport expansion and the constantly increasing cost of the city manager’s budget.
“The local “boss” of our politics, Sam Cameron, the general manager of the daily monopoly newspaper has ordered an all-out attack on the recall which is going down as the “dirtiest” campaign in Long Beach’s colorful election history.
“Over $40,000 was used in attacking personalities and no significant rebuttal of the issues of the 5% utility tax, the Queen Mary scandal or the airport vote switch was attempted.
“The recall election is Tuesday, December 15, 1970.”
(Source: “STOP! The Journal of Common Sense”, Long Beach, December — 1970)
great list mike. greet is right, why are we allowing city staff to stonewall council directions? i have my own suspicions naturally.
City Staff takes direction from City Manager Pat West, who in turn is a puppet for Mayor Foster and Councilman DeLong. Pat West will not address voted upon Council actions if Foster or DeLong oppose those actions. Long Beach is not a democracy. Long Beach is Bob Foster’s personal Monarchy.
Naples Island residents voted to tax themselves to put their utilities underground, yet they refused to pay for rebuilding the seawalls that prevent their homes from falling in the ocean.
http://longbeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=244222&GUID=684D49B5-AACD-429B-8238-090BF68B0DCE
Were Naples residents more worried about the cosmetic appearances of their community than its integrity. Or could it be Councilman DeLong and Mayor Foster (who lives in Naples) were following up on promises of public funding made to the Naples community prior to the past election? What better way to secure election contributions.
Or could it be that the Naples homeowners simply view the seawalls as city infrastructure and, so, the City’s responsibility to maintain?
The seawalls do not only benefit those homeowners. Many people who do not live in the area stroll and boat along those canals throughout the year.
While I think it would be great if the homeowners would voluntarily agree to assess themselves a reasonable annual sum to *help* with the costs of keeping the seawalls maintained, I do not think they should be required to do so.
Dear Mr. Greet: While it is undoubtedly true that some relatively small proportion of city residents “stroll and boat” through Naples, the overwhelming proportion of the benefit of the seawalls goes to the waterfront homeowners. Their houses are prevented from FALLING IN THE WATER.
These homeowners pay ONE TWELFTH of the fee paid by other private boatowners who have boat slips at the City’s marina. Like the marina slips, the Naples residents get slips over public waters. And the Naples owners get a slip literally in their backyard with ocean access. This represents a gift of public funds to these Naples waterfront residents. Surely they could be required to pay something more!
Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day –- History Repeats Itself (Part Two)
Headline:
“The Long Beach Recall – Some Questions And Answers”
Column headline:
“Prattle” by Ed Bynon
“Take courage! Whatever you decide to do, it will probably be wrong.
“Because of the number of questions I have had I’ll just make a Q. and A. column out of this one. These are as straight from the shoulder as I can give.”
“Q. WAS THE 5% UTILITY TAX NECESSARY?”
“A. No. Although the City Manager and City Council claimed it was they did not cut the “fat” out. (See city employee’s ad on p.7). The budget could have been balanced by cutting spending to meet income instead of going to this oppressive tax.”
“Q. THE QUEEN MARY IS A GOOD IDEA – WHY IS IT SUCH AN ISSUE?”
“A. The Queen Mary was a good idea…it was not good deal. We are now in our fourth year with the ship. We are in trouble and have $42 millons in our PUBLIC MONEY involved. We are in countless lawsuits. We do not have an operator for it. The issue is that NO plans or studies or thinking was done until after the ship bought. This was NOT GOOD GOVERNMENT! It was inexcusable and because so many political careers are involved there is a vast cover-up going on.”
“Q. BUT IT’S NOT TAX MONEY, IS IT?”
“A. No, it is not tax money, but money is money, and this is public money. There is no excuse for stupidity just because this is public oil money. This lack of regard for good government is astounding. The money can be spent elsewhere, regardless of the half-truths we hear.”
Q. ISN’T THE AIRPORT ISSUE DEAD? I WAS THINKING PROP. T DECIDED THAT?”
“The airport issue is far from dead. Don’t forget the City Council and City Manager never give up. The public voted down a new city hall and library. The manager and council went to a “leaseback” deal and is going to build one anyway. The public voted down the idea of fluoridation of water.
“The council and manager rammed it through. Then the people vetoed transferring tax assessing to L.A. county…they put it on the ballot again and torpedoed the opposition…it passed…the Queen Mary was so preposterous they never asked the public…the usages of the tidelands oil they never asked the people. No, my friends, the airport issue is not dead by any stretch of the imagination. The city hall-library project and fluoridation were also voted down.”
(Source: “STOP! The Journal of Common Sense”, Long Beach, December – 1970)
Why is the city using $10 million of TAXPAYERS money for maintaining Naples Island seawalls for a small group of WEALTHY ELITE, yet my neighbors and I must pay $5,000 to have our alleys repaired?
Hello Mr. McCabe, I think your point is well taken. Municipal boat slip fees should be set at a standard per-foot rate, regardless of which city-operated marina we are discussing, and then increase from there based upon the proximity of the slip to one’s residence. That sort of connvenience should certainly justify a somewhat higher fee.
Do the Naples homeowners also own the docks that are contiguous to their homes or does the city retain ownership of those and lease them to the homeowners in question?
In any case, I think the seawalls should be considered as a completely separate matter. I think those should be considered city infrastructure and city responsibility. Again, however, I think it would be only proper for those homeowners who live immediately behind them to volunteer to assist with the cost of maintaining them.
I bet the county tax assessor won’t hesitate to declare the value of these homes greater after the seawall is built and adjust the property taxes accordingly.
The entire cost of any sea wall repair should be paid for by the City.
The issue goes well beyond those homes(which any member of the public
are free to purchase when they come on the market) that front the water.
Consider:
What would happen were the sea wall to collapse? Eventually,would not
the home,as wee as the pubic roadway and side walk behind it fall into
the sea? Eventually,the water would be lapping at Second Street?
What say you to the homeowners in west Long Beach whose homes were
flooded in years past because they purchased homes close to the storm
drains which continually overflowed? Should they have paid for the
needed projects to keep the water from flooding their homes.
Though it should be noted the good Mr. Mc Cabe has a solid point on the
slip fee issue.Federal Doctrine which tolls well over 200 years holds those
waters belong to the People of the United States.It matters not who owns
the land.The slip sees should be in concert with those in the City Marinas-
which of course have just gone up–AND ARE ABOUT TO GO UP AGAIN-
and AGAIN….as a result of Marina Gate(Alamitos Bay Marina Re Build
Plan).
This is part of the whole can of sea-worms that is subsidy to those in Long Beach who can own or recreate expensively next to the water.
Today we call to attention subsidized boat slips and above sea-level living in Naples. But don’t forget docks and decks built out over public lands (but claimed as property by Peninsula homeowners–District Weekly had a nice story on this), and absurdly low lease terms to Our Betters’ Yacht Clubs.
LB as America’s Corrupted Aquatics Capital?
Controlling Federal Doctrine allows for an individual or group(HOA) to,
at its own expense,build a dock et al in front of their own property,as
long as it conforms to USACE and USCG CFRS.
The undewrlying concept is that any member of the public may purcased
the land either singularly or as a member of a (HOA-Common Interest
developm,enmt VOID OF ANY RESTRICTIVE clauses._.
It is the latter-pointswhere Foster and Delong went afoul of the RICO
ACT–visa a via:
.Giving public monies to their fellow LBYC member for the conntentiuous
and dangerous compents in the Alamitos Bay Marina Re build plan–
particualy for creating slips for the circa 10-12 501C3–Cal 37′s for the
Congressional Cup boats—which also,like the proposed new LBYC
wrap aroiund long dock will
FURTHER.CONSTRICT,NARROW,REDUCE the already constriced
and congested waters-there in negeatively impacting circa 3000 other
boaters–on the boating publlic.
At the end of the day the above will rersult in the departure not on;y of
the boating adverse,uncertifdied.unschooled.untrained” I am a bean
counter..not a boater” Manager of the Marine Bureau,kept in office by
the,over his head CityManager but both De Long and Foaster who will
be sent to Coventry.
Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day – History Repeats Itself (Part Three)
Editorial Page Headline:
“Dirtiest Campaign Ever’ By Mayor And Machine”
Sub Headline:
“Administration, Unable To Defend 5% Utility Tax,
Queen Mary Scandal, and Airport Charges
Launches Smear Attack On Crusading Editor”
Editorial:
“Why The Smokescreen?”
“BY NOW SOME OF you silent majority types are probably a little confused by the way the city administration and daily monopoly newspaper has blown its cool over a “few local dissidents.”
“The fact is, these boys are worried sick that they are in trouble with you folks and they know they can’t face the facts this little paper has been dishing up to the light of day, so they have come up swinging with every trick in the propaganda book.
“THE RECALL PEOPLE are not Nazis, and they are not Commies. They’re ordinary, God-fearing, tax-paying, children-raising people who want to live in Long Beach and be left alone by the horde of bureaucrats and fast-buck boys haunting city hall who are pushing everything from marijuana (which must have been responsible for the purchase of the Queen Mary) to airport expansion by questionable means, to fireworks and pike gambling.
“IT IS IMPORTANT to remember that instead of answering the barrage of serious scandals thrown at them by this little paper that they have come on like gangbusters to attack characters and call names and do everything except deny the charges.
“THE REASON IS SIMPLE. They cannot deny what has been said because it is true and can be proven. They refuse to take lie detector tests. Doesn’t this tell you something?
“THIS TOWN HAS BEEN given to the daily monopoly newspaper by default. This STOP! is the first voice which has spoken up for eighteen years. These boys are panic-stricken. The publisher of STOP! is no angel nor is likely to be sainted, but you may rest assured he learned his trade in a rough-and-tumble area and can give and take with anything this city has to offer.
“THE REASON the Independent-Press-Telegram and the city hall crowd are name-calling is simple. Don’t forget…they cannot deny…dare not deny…what has been printed.
“They must confuse you and lead you astray with smears…or they lose! It is simple.
“FOR THE FIRST TIME in 18 years the residents are going to get two sides to a question. Don’t you wonder what may happen? If not this time…then next time.”
(Source: “STOP! The Journal of Common Sense”, Long Beach, December — 1970)
@Laurence: Can you please translate what you wrote?
who are the “coventry” that sounds downright weird…just sayin’
@Dwight: Wherever did you find this article? I love the excerpts you posted recently–they are really quite profound in light of today’s city’s current events. So funny the line about the city council pushing marijuana. It seems LB really hasn’t come a long way, baby, at all, has it?
Just announced $850,000 of taxpayers money spent to upgrade Naples restrooms and beach area.
http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_19022723
The above mentioned $850,000 follows a $650,000 upgrade to Naples Island children’s playground.
http://longbeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=596855&GUID=E98F76FA-38B6-4CC5-B494-D20E847C1436
Peninsula private homes encroaching on public beach property.
“This is an issue the city of Long Beach has quietly set aside, ignoring encroachment,” by the wealthy elite.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local&id=5623284
Coastal Commission issues warning to wealthy elite peninsula residents to stop encroachment.
http://www.lbsurfrider.org/l-b-homeowners-to-be-warned/
On April 21, 2011, “The city of Long Beach announced Thursday that a slew of renovation and beautification projects along the peninsula are now complete.”
http://www.lbpost.com/news/allison/11503
Where else in Long Beach is all this taxpayers money spent being spent improving the community? Why is soooooo much taxpayers money being spent on Naples and the Peninsula, the two wealthiest areas of Long Beach, yet the city abandoned the Kcroc Center in North Long Beach?
Note to Mike Ruehle:
l.The Kroc center was DOA the moment Snoop Dogg’s name was
attached to it.
2.The location was in the middle of a de jure flood plain.
3.A new location has been selected for a project which will provide
the same improvements.
People should keep in mind the tax base of the peninsula and Naples
essentially pays for LBPD and LBFD in the Districts which the new
project(replacing the Kroc center) will be replaced.
Also,portions of the just completed Mother’s Beach facilities flowed from
Tidelands.A close examination would show the majority of those using
Mother;s Beach–are not from the Third District.
Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day – An Easy Source of Revenue
Headline:
“I Owe How Much?”
“As anyone who has received a traffic ticket knows, there’s no such thing as a “simple” traffic fine in California. For years, the state has been piling fees on to base fines, resulting in a total cost that’s many times the base amount. Here, for example (below) is the approximate fine for a seatbelt violation.
“Traffic laws exist to protect motorists, and Auto Club supports measures that reinforce safe driving. But singling out motorist as an easy source of revenue is unjust. If you agree, make your voice heard by contacting your state representative or senator.”
“Total: $141
State penalty assessment: $20
County penalty assessment: $14
Court security fee: $30
Conviction assessment: $35
DNA penalty assessment: $4
Court penalty assessment: $10
Surcharge: $4
EMS penalty assessment: $4
Base fine: $20”
“For more information, visit AAA.com/roadahead.”
(Source: “Westways” The Magazine For Auto Club Members, For Members Section, October, 2011)
(Note: The above has been modified for space and clarity.)
Larry,
1. I hadn’t heard about it. Where is this new location that has been selected for the Kroc Center project? When was that City Council agends item passed?
2. Where is the $80 million funding coming from that the Salvation Army was going to donate to the Kroc Center if the City of Long Beach could raise $15 million? When was that City Council agenda item passed?
3. You state, “a close examination WOULD show the majority of those using Mother;s Beach–are not from the Third District.” You may be correct for 4-months in the summer. However, the other 8-months is an entirely different story. Haven’t you forgotten about volleyball players and paddlers using that area and are they not from District 3? I paddle around that area all year long and think a close examination would prove you wrong.
Larry,
I forgot to mention that my house has been sitting in the middle of a flood plain since it was built in 1924. What’s you point?
Note to Mike:
l.The project’ and new location were well covered in media
a few months ago.To best of my recollection it is somewhere
adjacent to-west end north of Long Beach City College.But,check
with 5th District Office Monday for exact location.
2.As to the flood plain issue.Apparently there are flood plains and then
there are flood plains.
3.As for Mother’s Beach. No question it enjoys heavy volleyball use/ My
sense is that a good portion come from the 3rd and 4th District. Yet,their
numbers are dwarfed by those using it for swimming-few of which enter
the water unless they are wearing jeans;;fewer still have parents that
speak English-which suggest they are not Third District residents.
“their
numbers are dwarfed by those using it for swimming-few of which enter
the water unless they are wearing jeans;;fewer still have parents that
speak English-which suggest they are not Third District residents.”
so you see what laurence’s real problem with beach use is…
ATTN MIKE RUEHLE
your earthlink email has been hacked, i just got this email from you
“.OMG! I�ve found the shop of my dream!” had a link im not going to republish as well.
Only about the 3rd time. It’s amazing the lengths people will go to shut out one person’s voice.
indeed it is, you are living proof of that.
As a former Naples resident (and proud one-time LB boat owner… of a 9-foot rowboat), I can speak with intimate knowledge of just how high the water rises right now on those sea walls. At times, on a super-high-tide and full moon, I’ve seen it within six inches of overflowing the walls at points.
It is easy to look at the demographics and say, “Oh, they’re rich… They should pay.” But if any other part of town were in direct risk of flooding due to planning decisions made nearly a century ago, would not the city and other authorities play a role in mitigating risk to human lives?
Protecting human lives is the first role of government. I applaud the city for dedicating Tidelands funds towards the cost of seawall repairs.
How are the lives of Naples residents being threatened????? Are they all made of sugar?
“It is easy to look at the demographics…”
Bill, apparently not so much:
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/CA-Long-Beach/Naples-people/r_116828/
The Shore is a lot more transparent:
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/CA-Long-Beach/Belmont-Shore-people/r_113713/
@ Bill: I do seem to recall a chronic flooding issue that was occuring on the west side not long ago. (A result of poor city rainfall drainage engineering, if I remember correctly.)
I do not recall anyone clamoring that those who live in that neighborhood pass the hat to pay for the repairs themselves. It was city infrastructure and taxpayer funds rightly paid to repair it.
How are these seawalls any different? They, too, are city infrastructure and they, too, should be maintained/repaired with taxpayer funds.
It seems to me that what this comes down to for some is just another version of class envy. “They must be wealthy, so they should pay. If they refuse, it can only be because they are stingy elitests” they seem to be saying.
City infrastructure is city infrastructure, regardless of where in the city it is located and regardless of the income brackets of the residents who live nearby.
City infrastructure requires taxpayer funding to maintain and repair. Period. This is precisely why we give government the authority to levy taxes and assess fees…to pay for things like infrastructure repair.
Mr. Greet: Respectfully, merely labeling the seawalls “city infrastructure” leads to your simplistic answer. Infrastructure is generally for the benefit of all the citizens. Roads and sewers benefit all more or less equally. These seawalls overwhelmingly benefit a VERY small group of citizens in a very direct way.
Moreover, Tidelands law prohibits the use of the City’s Tidelands Fund for the use of private parties. It cannot be spent to principally benefit private parties. Tidelands money is specifically for the benefit of all citizens of California equally. Principally benefitting Naples waterfront properties does not meet that test.
The City Attorney has stated that these properties can be legally assessed for all or part of the cost of repair. What is the allergic reaction to those most directly benefitting and most able to bear part of the cost having to pay SOMETHING toward these repairs?? This could be done by assessing the homeowners a more realistic slip fee, an issue with which you apparently find some agreement with me.
Mr. McCabe, thank you for the response. I am an admitted layperson in this area so you’ll understand if my answer seems simplistic. Beyond that, I think the simplest answers are often also the best.
In this case, I think that it is inarguable that these seawalls are, indeed, an aspect of general city infrastructure and, as such, it is the city, not the homeowners, which should rightly bear the primary responsibility for the maintenance and repair.
Do the Naples homeowners benefit greatly and directly from this infrastructure? Sure they do. That’s why I think they should agree to voluntarily assess themselves a nominal amount to assist with the seawall maintenance and repair. I am also not averse to the idea of increased slip fees according to the criterion mentioned previously. If the city chooses to use part of those fees to offset *some* of its own annual seawall maintenance and repair costs then I think it would be reasonable to do so.
I am, however, averse to the homeowners shouldering *all* of these costs. Others do benefit from this infrastructure and, because of this, the city should assume at least some, if not most, of those costs.
My allergic reaction in this case has more to do with the bigger picture of fiscal responsibility in government. You may or may not agree but I think the city abjectly squanders many millions of taxpayer dollars each and every fiscal year. The persistent budget deficits seem to prove this. So every single time the city seeks to further burden any of us with additional taxes and/or fees, I am dubious as to the true need and doubtful as to the true motivation.
At some point, just as with our equally fiscally irresponsible state and federal governments we, as taxpayers, really have to just say “No, enough is enough. You do not have a revenue problem, you have a spending problem and, just like we all have to do, you have to learn to operate responsibly within the budget we give you.”
We voters in Long Beach have grown far too accustomed to our electeds and appointeds dictating various terms to us, rather than the converse.
I really think we need to change that.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day – From the Devil’s Dictionary
“MALE, n. A member of the unconsidered, or negligible sex. The male of the human race is commonly known (to the female) as Mere Man. The genus has two varieties: good providers and bad providers.” — Ambrose Bierce
“MAGIC, n. An art of converting superstition into coin. There are other arts serving the same high purpose, but the discreet lexicographer does not name them.” — AB
“DEAD, adj. Done with the work of breathing; done with all the world; the mad race run though to the end; the golden goal attained and found to be a hole.” — AB
“WITCH, n.(1) Any ugly and repulsive old woman, in a wicked league with the devil.(2) A beautiful and attractive young woman, in wickedness a league beyond the devil.” — AB
“FRIENDLESS, adj. Having no favors to bestow. Destitute of fortune. Addicted to utterance of truth and common sense.” — AB
“COMPROMISE, n. Such an adjustment of conflicting interests as gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have, and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due.” — AB
“NEIGHBOR, n. One whom we are commanded to love as ourselves, and who does all he knows how to make us disobedient.” — Ambrose Bierce
(Source: thinkexist.com)
Let’s see how many Naples residents show up to voice their opinion about the 12-story 2nd & PCH monolith project in their back yard that is going before Planning Commission on October 12. They probably don’t care about the expected traffic gridlock because they can always take their Duffy boats to Seal Beach where their cars are parked.
I like Duffy boats. They’re fun for puttering around in the Naples canals that the seawalls created and help protect for non-Naples residents like me and many, many others.
Councilman DeLong announced last week the $3.0 million rebuild of the Leeway Sailing Center on the Peninsula across from Naples will commence early next year.
More money has been spent on that small section of the Peninsula over the past 5-years than was the city’s portion of the Kroc Center that was abandoned. Apparently some areas of Long Beach are more deserving of taxpayer’s money than other areas.
With high property values on Naples then wouldn’t they also pay a higher rate of property tax to the city (via the county).
If 70% of the city general fund is for public safety then who benefits the most from Police/Fire service? The lower income areas I would assume. This is where our public safety (police/fire) concentrates their services.
I would suspect the Naples residents have higher incomes than the average LB citizen and they probably spend more in the city which contributes more towards the tax base then a lower income person.
I suppose we could wish Naples Island would return to wet lands but it woulld be a financial hit to the local economy.
Personally, I’ve paid over $125,000 in property taxes over the past 25 years. Please tell me Mr.Gehler what I got for my property taxes? My street was not ever repaved. My sidewalks weren’t repaired. My alley hasn’t been repaired. The police don’t do their jobs resulting in prosecutions. What exactly did my neighbors and I get for our property taxes that went into the general fund?
Meanwhile, I watch as MY tax money gets allocated to streets, sidewalks, sewers, parks, seawals and sailing centers for Naples and the Penisula, not my own community.
It’s HAVE$ and HAVE NOTS in Long Beach. And the HAVE$ certainly get more than their proportionate share.
“It’s HAVE$ and HAVE NOTS in Long Beach. And the HAVE$ certainly get more than their proportionate share.”
dont mourn, organize.
How do you “organize” when so few care?
Home ownership in Long Beach is 49% compared to a nationwide average of 65%. The majority of people living in Long Beach are renters and don’t care about what happens to the city they live in. And its not too hard to figure out that the HAVE$ are all in the 49% minority.
http://www.presstelegram.com/ci_19058673?IADID=Search-www.presstelegram.com-www.presstelegram.com
Making a lawful choice to rent and not caring about the city one lives in are not automatically synonymous. Any more, by the way, than home ownership automatically confers upon some the ability to be constructive and productive forces for change in their communities.
To make such a statement concerning those who choose to rent is to frame the argument in the tired class-warfare rhetoric of envy and entitlement. Such language and sentiments are divisive, not uniting. They are corrosive, not consensus-building. They are destructive, not productive.
Absolutely right, Mr. Greet.
Can we start to pick and choose then? I haven’t been on a bike in fifteen years. Why should I pay for bike lanes? Futhermore, I don’t go to the park and rarely use public sidewalks. Naples is a destination based on our water and beaches. I forgot to mention that I don’t go to the beach either. Hack that off of my taxes also.