Fake Names, Fake Contributions to Debate Over Proposed Power Plant?

Fraudulent names are by their nature deceitful.

Credibility comes from those who don't hide behind a fake name.

Some of the pro-power plant posts are similar in nature to what you might expect from a paid, public relations firm representative. Contributions that come from names that are not registered voters in Redondo Beach certainly make you wonder: who or what entity is behind them?

For those people new to this debate (and for the most part, civil discussion) on this great discussion platform, "The Patch," please be advised that it appears some of the people “chiming in” have false, misleading agendas and names. It's easy to deceive when hiding behind a fake name.

I respectfully ask my neighbors to consider the source when reviewing the discussions on this site. I respect the opinions of my true neighbors even if I disagree with them. In fact, right or wrong, my opinions represent an ardent desire for a better, healthier and happier community. Even if I can't fathom why someone would support additional pollution, if they are my neighbor, I believe they should be treated with respect and in a nice neighborly way. It's hard to respect someone hiding behind a mask or fake identity.

As much as I love this site, "The Redondo Patch," the one change I would recommend is a requirement for legitimacy regarding identity. For instance, before you can submit a letter to the editor, in a print publication, you are required to state "in what city and state you reside" and supply contact information. It would be cool if people were required to post what city or town they are from. It would be great perspective, to know this information, so we can consider whether or not the person stating their opinion has an alternative agenda.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 02:59 AM
The No on A folks are so scared of our commentary that they block people from seeing our comments on their Facebook site. Obviously they are not open for fair and open debate. I guess if you can't support your side, you block the counter opinion. So far the Yes on A site allows open unfiltered debate. No on A passes out misinformation about the open process we used to develop Measure A. Shame on them for casting this stone, when they won't allow open debate on their own site. That alone speaks volumes.
Robert Keane February 07, 2013 at 05:48 AM
Hey Jim. What about your lawsuit that cost the city nearly a million dollars? Do the voters know that? Do they know that you let your lawyer charge $550 an hour? Do they know that you refused to negotiate a lower price and save the tax payers money? Do they know that a city councilman is expected to protect our money and not waste it on overpaid lawyers?
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 05:51 AM
Fred, can you name one of the people that are posting here that make "pro-power plant posts". I'll answer for you, No. The reality is you do not appreciate other people's opinions, even if they generally agree with you. I'm not sure if anyone actually wants the plant. Even Pendergraft would walk away if the offer was right. You have been so stuck in your opinion, that you flat out refuse to even see other peoples ideas. I have said many times that I do not want the plant, I would be happy if it's gone. Even with my emphatic statements you chose to bash me as a pro-power plant, big tobacco, AES, confederate and PR firm amount other things. I'm all for the clean air, just not at the cost of bankrupting the city. You need to see the other options, you have lots of time to buy out the plant, then you can zone your property the way you want. Until then measure a is a land grab that stomps on private property rights!
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 06:13 AM
If he and Brand end up on the council, there will be deadlock. They will sue the city (again) and cost the taxpayers more money. They have the "my way or the highway" attitude. They have already cost the city close to a million bucks from the first lawsuit, the second one will come quicker and cost more. Avoid these candidates and save taxpayer funds!
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 06:27 AM
Robert - you are like a broken record. So here again ate the facts: 1) The City Council violated the City Charter. 2) The residents funded a lawsuit asking the court to order the City to follow the Charter. 3) The judge ruled for the people and ordered the City Council to follow the Charter. 4) The City Council complied but then doubled legal costs by filing a frivolous appeal. 5) Three judges unanimously threw out the City's appeal. You should vent your anger at those found guilty of breaking the law rather than the residents who refused to let them get away with it. Mr. Keane continues to leave out critical information. For example, the judges found that the legal fees were reasonable. Keane only quotes the cost of the head of the law firm, he leaves out the lower rates for others in the firm. And we did negotiate. In fact our lawyer agreed to settle with the City and did not recover all the costs he could have. Keane also leaves out that the people's attorney was at risk for recouping their legal costs. The City's two firms got their full pay despite the fact that they lost the suit and the appeal. I am proud of my role in holding the Council accountable to the people and to the City Charter. And I would do it again either as a resident or as a Councilman. We should not allow any City elected official or staff to break the City Charter.
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 06:31 AM
Kelly - you continue to refuse to tell folks your real name and what town you live in. You are berating Fred for something another commentor, David Mallen said. He didn't even mention your fake name in his post. Methinks thou doest protest too much. You pretend to be against the power plant, but you've yet to map an alternate route to no power plant without Measure A.
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 06:36 AM
Person who uses the name Kelly, You seem fixated on lawsuits. AES will sue. Bill Brand and Jim Light will sue. Funny how we were able to compromise between inputs from residents, businessmen, bikers, boaters, Commissioners, Councilmen, the State Coastal Conservancy, and the State Coastal Commission staff, but we have a my way or the highway attitude. And like Robert, you attack the wrong people. Your anger should be vented at those found guilty of breaking the law. Not those who held them accountable.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 06:53 AM
Jim, I saw some people from the public safety associations this weekend. How come they are not supporting you? Prolly cause you are a single issue candidate! Don't bring up your platform either, or I will be forced to post the screen shot of your platform prior to being called out on the public safety issue.
Fred Reardon February 07, 2013 at 07:06 AM
Thank you for posting Kelly (or whomever you are). You have done our community a great service by optimizing the concerns I have expressed above and by providing a clear example, to my real neighbors; of the kind of propaganda battle we are experiencing. In addition to the pollution, this kind of propaganda campaign is precisely why the citizens of Redondo Beach will Vote Yes for Measure A and send a message to those that are trying to pollute and threaten our community that we are not easily manipulated. There are no other options, at this point, to rid our community of the smoke stacks. Therefore, Vote Yes on Measure A.
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 07:08 AM
Put up whatever screen shot you want. I do not believe any candidate is against public safety. I am sure every one of them is for restoring their ranks to safe levels. Not sure what this has to do with the blog post but if you insist on continuing your smear campaign: I did not interview with the police, the firemen or the Chamber because I want to be free of bias and free of real or perceived conflict of interest in my actions as Councilman if the voters would so honor me. How can you negotiate a contract with these organizations in good faith if you are beholden to them for your campaign support? If people go to my website; www.jimlightforcouncil.com ; they will find my platform is hardly single issue, but more than that, I have a 10 year track record backing my platform. I fought 3000 condos in 2002 (the Heart of the City). I fought turning Torrance Blvd into high density condo zoning. I coauthored Measure DD, now part of the City Charter giving all voters a say in the zoning decisions of our city. I participated in the Mayor's Citizen Growth Management and Traffic Committee. I am a co-author of Measure A. I continue to participate in the CenterCal workshops and the Harbor Blvd reconfiguration workshops. (funny you claim to be active in the City, but I've not seen you at any of these events) Continue your attacks on me, but your statements don't bear scrutiny.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:13 AM
Jim, how about your bias concerning the power plant, lawsuits and any growth idea in the city? Kinda seems you are beholden to certain groups but not others.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:16 AM
Way to NOT answer the question. You are short on answers to the simple questions. You are too busy waving Jim Lights pom poms to see other ways around the plant issue.
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 07:24 AM
Your statement makes no sense. I don't take money from any of those and most are not organizations. I base my positions on the research I do. Measure A has 433,000 sq ft of development. I am hardly anti-development. I am not against all development. I am against overdevelopment. I support the Shade Hotel in the harbor because it is quality development and balances public amenities with the developers returns.
L. Campeggi February 07, 2013 at 07:28 AM
One of the more common tactics of those who can't provide a good refutation of an argument is to divert attention away from the argument by calling attention to something about the person who made the argument. The ad hominem is attractive to lazy thinkers, who would rather ridicule or belittle a person than seriously examine an opposing viewpoint. Kelly Sarkisian is not a Redondo Beach registered voter.
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:34 AM
By your own statements, your research shows the public safety departments are in need of people, yet you chose not to support them or be supported by them. Maybe it wasn't your hoice, it was theirs!
Kelly Sarkisian February 07, 2013 at 07:36 AM
Isn't that what your friend Fred did?
Jim Light February 07, 2013 at 07:39 AM
I have never chosen not to support the public safety departments. I have never had any opportunity to not support them. Your statement makes no sense. It was my choice not to interview. They did not force me not to interview. Again, your statement makes no sense.
Jack Charles February 07, 2013 at 03:54 PM
Give it a rest, Kelly. You come off as completely unhinged.
Diana G February 07, 2013 at 06:08 PM
Thanks Kelly Sarkisian! I will vote YES on Measure "A"!!! YES on Measure "A"!!!
mark schoennagel February 07, 2013 at 06:32 PM
Hey Fake-name Sarkisian, you label Jim as a one issue candidate but then go on to attack him over several other issues he supports. So which is it? I must admit over the past few months I have been quite impressed with every single post Jim Light has made. Redondo Beach has so much potential that is currently being robbed by that nasty power plant and by some city planners who just haven't got a clue. Both Bill Brand and Jim Light though do have a clue, and have it right for growth in Redondo. Smart, well planned, well designed growth, not a bunch of horrible condos and certainly not a new power plant. Rock on guys!! Vote Yes On A!!!!
L. Campeggi February 07, 2013 at 06:45 PM
The fallacy in the ad hominem is due to the irrelevant nature of the appeal made. If what is said about the person is false, in addition to being irrelevant, two fallacies are committed, false premise and irrelevant premise. Kelly Sarkisian is not a Redondo Beach registered voter.
Michael E. February 07, 2013 at 07:02 PM
I lived in Redondo Beach for 30 years, and presently, I have lived in Torrance for nearly 10 years. For close to four decades, my family and I have lived downwind of the power plant, and we have been subjected unwillingly to its unhealthy and potentially deadly influence. I have met and spoken to Bill Brand and Jim Light on several occasions, and as well, I've followed this debate concerning Heart of the City and the Power Plant Closure, for over ten years. I attended a critical city council meeting in Oct.-Nov., 2011, at which AES's Pendergraft spoke, and I was witness to a shameful and completely inappropriate display of ego and hubris by certain members of the council. Even though I do not live in Redondo, I spend a good deal of time there, and I feel a strong connection to the city. My point is this: Bill and Jim have always been above board, stalwart and trustworthy, passionate and tenacious in their zeal to see this issue through, and DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY! Do I believe what AES is telling us: NO, I do not. Do I think that MOST of the council members and the mayor are looking out for the citizens? No, as an impartial observer, my feeling is that they have a different agenda than one which reflects the best interests of the whole community. Citizens of Redondo Beach: You need Bill and Jim sitting on the council to keep a balance and to prevent outside corporate interests from changing your town into a place that you won't want to call home.....
Alexander Starr February 07, 2013 at 07:10 PM
"Right growth in Redondo. Smart, well planned, well designed growth, not a bunch of horrible condos and certainly not a new power plant. Rock on guys!! Vote Yes On A!!!!" PERFECTLY stated. Well written, Mark Schoennagel! Rock on!!
sheri patterson February 08, 2013 at 03:30 AM
Robert, please remind me why the residents sued the city? Was it because the city chose to break the law even after hundreds of residents repeatedly warned them that they must put all large zoning decisions before the voters? And if I remember correctly, was this another issue over big development, a very sensitive subject for residents due to abuse in power by previous city councils?
sheri patterson February 08, 2013 at 03:54 AM
Michael E, you summed it up perfectly. Many of us have put forth a lot of effort and done relentless research to put a vision forward that is fiscally responsible and legally sound while also making our community a healthier place. Why have we invested time in this effort? This is our home and we plan to be here for a long time. It isn't a coincidence that the Chamber is against folks like Bill and Jim Light. That should be important for voters to notice. It isn't surprising that Jim Light wouldn't even interview with the police/fire for endorsements, because he did not want to be beholden to them. Jim is fiscally conservative and believes the city pensions have to continue to be worked on. They are not sustainable as is. Jim is known for his character. Just like Bill Brand turning down all sorts of campaign donations from entities that likely wanted return favors. These men are solid and will do what is right. Every week I read the attacks on Jim Light. It's commonplace that the best candidates and those that pose the biggest threat to the status quo (or the good ole boys club/ big business developers/AES), get attacked for their courage, integrity and leadership. That is just politics & from those entities, I say 'consider the source'.
sheri patterson February 08, 2013 at 04:00 AM
The reality is most folks with smarts and strong character would never put up with this nonsense and hence have no interest in running for office and trying to challenge the controlling entities. That probably explains why often times our choice when voting is despressing. So I salute both Bill Brand and Jim Light for having a heart to do what is right and for enduring the disrespectful personal attacks to make the place I'm raising my kids a better place. I hope more residents will take the time to carefully evaluate the choices they have this March. Our community needs honest leadership.
Kelly Sarkisian February 08, 2013 at 04:19 AM
Kind of a bad day to pick on public safety pensions isn't it Sherry? I guess you think a crappy retirement would compensate the cops trying to catch that guy running around killing citizens/cops? Ask the widow of the Riverside cop! Very insensitive while public safety is protecting you!
mark schoennagel February 08, 2013 at 05:49 AM
Your comments are just plain sad fake-name-Kelly...sad. Thankfully no innocent people were seriously hurt last night, judging by the looks of things that could have been much worse. Scary to know that was just a couple blocks away from my house. Ironically the last time something woke me up in the weeee hours like that was the last time the AES plant had one of its awesome steam vents. Lets not forget about the noise pollution either. Yes on A!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something