Blog: If You Can't Dazzle Them With Brilliance, Baffle Them With Bull

AES spending hundreds of thousands of dollars because they know Measure A is the only real threat to approval of their new power plant.

AES is showing its desperation. They know that Measure A is the only real threat to their application to build a new plant in our town. They know that the CEC will not likely override zoning approved by a vote of the residents. They know that the Redondo Plant is not critical to our grid reliability and that there are more critical sites and better alternatives than building a new plant in Redondo. 

AES’ only real hope is to deceive or scare residents into rejecting Measure A. And they are trying to do just that by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to bombard us with unsupported fear mongering, intimidation, and inaccurate statements everywhere we turn. They have indundated our mailboxes. They have bought two ads on Verizon and Time Warner. They have plastered billboards along our roads—a first in Redondo politics. They have bought lawn signs. They have paid for robocalls and “push” polls. They have even paid residents to be their mouthpieces. 

This is our town. AES is a Virginia based, multi-billion dollar company that could care less about our community. AES Southland President, Eric Pendergraft does not live here. The AES Project Manager, Jennifer Didlo, does not live here. They want to build a new plant in our town and take the profits to Virginia. They don’t have to live with the  blight, pollution, and ruined views of a new power plant. We do.

But that is not enough for AES, they want more. If AES REALLY cared about the community, they would build the new plant in the middle of their property to provide the maximum buffer from all the surrounding uses. Instead, AES has moved the new plant as close as they possibly can to Redondo residential neighborhoods so they can free up the maximum amount of land to further increase their profits by adding mixed-use, commercial/residential waterfront development  on top of the new plant. So we get traffic and condos on top of the blight, pollution and ruined views—AES gets even more profits. Nice.  Some of our opposition calls that a “compromise”.

Look at the AES propaganda. None if it says we need power from this site. Most of them are one line statements about how devastating Measure A will be. The one statement about a "tidal wave of taxes" is from some guy from up north who is developing 600 homes in California. But there is never any substantiation or justification for any of the statements. 

In general their statements cannot be supported. Measure A is a zoning change.  It does not require AES to sell or give away their property. It does not obligate the City to buy any property. It does not raise taxes. It does not mandate a “regional” park.  The major difference between Measure A and current zoning is the phase out of power generation and replacing it with up to 433,333 square feet of commercial/institutional zoning ... the same density allowed in the harbor and pier zoning. Measure A zoning is on firm legal ground as it is built from existing city zoning, follows the recommendation of the 2004 City staff report, and includes input from three different land use legal firms. The City Attorney's Impartial Analysis of Measure A does not assess that the Measure A zoning is illegal or represents a "taking." The growing number of local attorney’s supporting Measure A shows they are not concerned about the legal grounds of Measure A.

I was particularly amused/disappointed with former Fire Chief Dan Madrigal putting his name to one of the most misleading and unsupported statements of the AES campaign. Here is a guy who lives in Laguna Hills, who living on the $200K+ salary PLUS health care benefits that WE taxpayers must pay for the rest of his life, helping AES with their unsupported fear campaign. 

Madrigal claims Measure A hurts funding for first responders while increasing the need for staff. This statement does not bear scrutiny. 

First off, City revenue from all 50 acres of the AES site is less than 1% of the total city revenues… in fact City revenue from AES barely covers Madrigal’s retirement benefits. The AES site produces less city revenue per acre than any other commercial/industrial use in the City. The pier/harbor parking lot produces way more. On top of that, a City study and staff reports call the power plant the “major blighting influence” in the harbor. The study shows substantial business revenue and property value depression in the harbor area, attributed to the presence of the power plant. In fact, the City and County formally deemed the property “blighted.” So not only does AES not pay its fair share, it depresses City revenues from the surrounding community. The commercial portion of Measure A would blow away the City revenues from AES—and removing the blighting influence will further increase city revenues from the surrounding community. So Measure A is BETTER for funding firefighters and police.

Secondly, AES and the former fire chief assert that open space requires more police and firefighter staffing. But a recent look at crime statistics reveals otherwise. Over a 90-day period, Veteran’s Park had just six police reports—none were violent crime or theft. Over the same period, the Riviera Village had 32 police reports and the area surrounding the Galleria Mall (they don’t report the crime that takes place at the mall) had a whopping 137 police reports—both areas had theft, assault and vandalism. The fear mongering that Measure A’s open space creates a greater need for police and fire staff is just not supported by the evidence.

I could take on each of AES’ unsupported fear-mongering statements, but I think you get the drift. 

AES used this same approach to defeat the ballot measure that would have required them to pay their fair share of City tax revenues. Councilman Aspel was quoted by the Easy Reader:  

“We estimate that by the end they spent $300,000 to $400,000 to send out campaign flyers with misstatements and outright lies.”  “Unfortunately, people who voted by absentee ballots were voting based on fear and not the truth. I firmly believe people were duped by AES….”

Don’t let yourself be duped by AES and their seemingly bottomless pocket book.  AES is desperate because they know Measure A is the ONLY serious threat to their application to build a new plant. Residents can never match AES’ campaign expenditures. But look which arguments are better supported and reasoned. Look who takes the time and effort to substantiate their statements.

Vote for a better future for our town. Vote for a waterfront free from industrial blight. Vote for cleaner air in our community. Vote for increased city revenues. Vote to make our town the Crown Jewel of the South Bay. Vote for a legacy we can all be proud of. 

Vote Yes on Measure A.

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.

DR February 15, 2013 at 12:53 AM
"So we get traffic and condos on top of the blight, pollution and ruined views—AES gets even more profits." This is not true Jim, it is currently zoned as park and conditional use power generation. It would need to get rezoned to Condos, and then get by the voters because of DD. Not likely, so that's more fiction. It's already been said that if we don't need the power (they can't find a buyer for the power) they will not build a power plant. Firefighter retirement benefits are not paid by the "taxpayers," cities, counties or state. Benefits are deferred compensation, and are paid by the employee funded retirement systems (typically CALPERS or a 1937 act Retirement Fund which are not government agencies). These funds come from employee and employer contributions made while the employee was working. And what I hear is true, "Republicans, Democrats, and Labor have all endorsed No On A These major groups in our community don't agree on much but the agree Measure A is a bad idea.", then it makes me even more resolute on Voting No On A www.facebook.com/NoOnARedondoBeach
Jim Light February 15, 2013 at 03:47 AM
DR - I hope Measure A passes and we never have to find out. If AES can throw hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat A how much do you think they'll throw at a ballot measure to give them great zoning? We have already seen one of their developers testify at a city council meeting. And their website clearly shows mixed use on the remaining land. Why else would them move the new plant right against their eastern property line? Measure A is the only thing that forces the CEC to demonstrate power is needed from this specific site and that there is no alternative. I'm sorry but firefighter benefits are covered by the taxpayers. From the 2012-2013 city budget: "However, the total cost for City employees will increase as we are buffeted by fast- rising health plan costs, workers compensation pay-outs and uncontrolled PERS retirement costs." "Employer contribution rate increases to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) from 14.080% to 14.526% for the miscellaneous group and from 38.386% to 40.391% for public safety." We keep a $3M reserve budget to absorb costs when Calpers has a bad year. The major groups you cite have always gone against residents and for whatever the Chamber goes for. They were for the 2998 condos of Heart of the City. They were against Measure DD which gives us all a say in zoning changes. These groups have always been on the wrong side of resident quality of life issues.
Kelly Sarkisian February 15, 2013 at 06:35 AM
You might want to look back at the historical data of the Chiefs retirement payments. I'm sure in the last 30 years it may have changed some. You are basing your statement on one year out of at least thirty. You have no data to make the statement you made! It is a common theme with you to make an opinion out of a small piece of data. I can't beleive you want to be on the council with the way you and your supporters conduct yourselves! You have sued the city, you have bad mouthed the hardworking police and fire unions, you hand wrote a land grab that could bankrupt the city, you have violated election laws with your gorilla signage, your supporters have acted like gangsters with anyone who doesn't agree with you, your supporters steal the oppositions signs, your position is contrary to most city/elected officials and you have no remorse for your shameful actions. You are whats wrong with politics! It's time to take a step back and think about your actions, you have made a mess of this election and possibly the city if you get elected. VOTE NO ON MEASURE A, PICK ANY CANDIDATE OTHER THAN LIGHT OR BRAND!
DR February 15, 2013 at 07:17 AM
Obviously you have NO understanding of what a city councilman's duties are, based on your quote, "... [Being elected] will give me a better platform to accomplish what I want to do for the residents...This is a natural extension of what I've been doing for years." - Easy Reader February 7, 2013 The key phrase being, "...what I want to do for the residents...", have you even considered doing what the constituents would want you to do? I guess not. "In the hurly-burly, competitive world of politics, it can be easy to overlook the fundamental fact: that the public expects and deserves its public servants to serve the public's interest..."
Jim Light February 15, 2013 at 02:27 PM
I am basing my statement on what I understand the first year's retirement pay for the Chief is. I understand it is around $240K+ health care. You accuse me of breaking an election law. I would like to know which election law that is. The only signs I have placed have been in people's yards or the property of business owners. Both sides have sign violations. Signs get stolen every election. I don't think any political organization condones it, but you can't control everyone. It happens every election. As to my actions, I am very proud. - I was a lead in stopping Heart of the City zoning for 2998 condos. - I wrote a 90 page assessment proving how flawed a city envirnmental study was. That stopped us from having hundreds of high density condos on Prospect. - I was a co-author of Measure DD, which now gives all of us the right to vote on major land use changes in our city. - I served on the Mayor's Citizens' Growth Management and Traffic Committee for over a year. One of the accomplishments of this group was setting standards for traffic congestion created by new development. - And now I am coauthor of Measure A which is the only thing that stands in the way of another 50 years of power plant pollution and blight on our waterfront.
Jim Light February 15, 2013 at 02:35 PM
DR If you have read my campaign platform and statement, I have always stated that my goals are revitalizing our town to be the Crown Jewel of the South Bay by ensuring: - A balance of developer profits against resident quality of life - Quality development, not over development - Preserving our quaint seaside village charm - Attracting businesses and institutions that provide a solid financial foundation for other businesses in their vicinity That is my platform that I would intend to carry out on behalf of the people. I think I could do that better as a Councilman than as an activist. I am at a point in my career where I can dedicate the time required to do the Council job properly. I believe I have proven my committment to representing the resident's side of issues more than any of my competitors. If people agree with my platform and want someone who will continue to represent their best interests and balance the interests of developers and businesses, then they should vote for me.
Alexander Starr February 15, 2013 at 06:59 PM
Kelly - you are the one who bad mouths people. Name calling, attack, threaten, misrepresent facts, fear mongering. That is all you do. No one takes you seriously. Your fake name represents well all your fake arguments. Meanwhile, Jim Light politely answer all you baseless attacks with FACTS and destroys your fear mongering arguments. We certainly do need a councilman that is educated, smart, successful, and can lead us to a better quality of life. His past actions and current energy to help us residents are clear and a breath of fresh-air. Time for new leadership in RB that has suffered so much from small-time thinking politicians beholden to developers pushing high-density development on us everywhere they can. That is why you and DR hide behind fake names and are so afraid of people like Jim Light and Bill Brand who are INDEPENDENT of special interest. They challenge the entrenched system that is corrupted and has made Redondo so much less than it could be. YES ON MEASURE A
Fred Reardon February 15, 2013 at 08:17 PM
Many Of these pro powerplant posts come from people with fake names that are not registered to vote in Redondo Beach. Please keep in mind, when you're reading these comments, they may be from a public relations firm hired to support the powerplant? Don't let AES pollute our landscape and our families lungs with a new powerplant. Vote Yes on measure A.
Tim Sole February 15, 2013 at 08:51 PM
Kelly and Fred, sometimes I think you two are married, if you aren't, you should be. You two are opposite sides of the same coin. The reality is, both of you have been tuned out by those of us digging for the actual facts. Could you two bring something to the game besides smear tactics and fear mongering!
John Mirassou February 15, 2013 at 11:13 PM
Jim, you really nailed that one, you baffle with bull quite well. Measure A will provide $8.5 million dollars in tax dollars to the city - Bull. City staff estimates are between $1.2 and $1.4. "They did it there we can do it here." - Bull. Chula Vista is zoned for 20 story high residential towers and a 30 story high resort hotel. Traffic and condos. Bull - You mentioned condos, no one else. Mixed use is a mix of uses, never any mention of condos from AES. The majority of attorneys in Redondo Beach support Measure A - Bull . . . not to mention ridiculous. Measure A is not a taking - Bull Measure A provides a reasonable value for AES - Bull Residents want Measure A - Bull I was in the Riviera a few weeks back and one of your followers stated emphatically "AES can not sue!" When pressed she repeated "AES can not file a lawsuit." - Yes On Measure A bull comes from the top down . . .
Fred Reardon February 15, 2013 at 11:30 PM
Mega Dittos Tim!
Jim Light February 16, 2013 at 02:57 AM
Saying something is "bull" does not make it so. My understanding is the Chula Vista power plant site will be mostly park: "The demolition opens up bay views and makes way for a public park." ABC News It is part of a bigger waterfront development though. The Easy Reader said AES contemplated commercial and condos, we didn't make that up. I don't recall saying a majority of attorneys support A, I think I said a growing number support A. Some are listed on the new NPP mailer. Measure A is not a taking. Local attorney David Mallen did a great job of explaining that on the No on A facebook page, but they deleted his posts. If the CEC denies AES' application, Measure A zoning is more valuable for AES than current zoning. Residents do want Measure A, otherwise, it would not be on the ballot. The election will tell if a majority of voters want A. That is the great thing about democracy. We can't control what everyone says any more than your side can. We've always said anyone can file a lawsuit on anything. Measure A is on firm legal ground. We are confident it will survive a lawsuit. AES is using the threat to intimidate the public. Shame on them. I hope people see through it. What would be "bull" is allowing a new unneeded power plant to pollute our air and blight our harbor for another 50 years. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity to create a revitalized waterfront free of blight. I hope folks vote Yes on A for the future of Redondo
John Mirassou February 16, 2013 at 04:13 AM
Fred, in very basic terms, a property owner has a right to the highest and best use of their land and the value that comes from that use. This includes potential uses. Measure A provides value on 1/3 of the property while devaluing the remaining 2/3 to zero. Even more basic. You want the amount of damages in the lawsuit? Take the value of the 1/3 and multiply it by two, the remainder of the property. A vote of the people is equivalent to a City Council ruling. Measure A (ie: the City if the Measure passes) "TAKES" 2/3 of the value of the property from the property owner without just compensation. What really scares me is Measure A supporters are making huge land use decisions without understanding this basic tenant of land use law. Clearly, if you don't understand this tenant then you cannot discern from where the eventual lawsuit will derive or the just compensation owed the property owner.
Fred Reardon February 16, 2013 at 04:21 AM
John, what exactly is Measure A taking? It does not take their property. AES does not have a permit to run a new plant. It does not effect AES's ability to finish their power contract. AES does not have a right to run a polluting power plant into eternity. So please tell me what is being taken?
Jim Light February 16, 2013 at 05:44 AM
John, This is just plan wrong. A property owner has no "right" to the "highest and best use" of their land. That would mean no zoning is valid. Your assessment of Measure A is incorrect as well. We took the density of the harbor zoning. We applied that density to all 50 acres of AES property to determine the development cap that is equivalent to the harbor zoning. We then built the Commercial/Institutional zoning so it would allow that development cap. Measure A gives AES the same density that is allowed in the harbor. AES has no right to expect more. So we did not take 2/3 of the value away. We gave them full value and designed it that they could get that full value out of 1/3 of the property and still have reasonable height limits and view corridors. It's a win/win. Two land use legal firms took our inputs on zoning and crafted Measure A. They certainly are under legal obligation to craft zoning for us based on "tenets" of land use law. A zoning change cannot take all value from a property, which Measure A does not. In fact, if the CEC denies AES' application, Measure A represents more value for AES than current zoning. You keep making the same statements but it does not appear that you understand the law.
sheri patterson February 17, 2013 at 02:34 AM
Wrong again Robert. Both Republicans & Democrats have come together beautifully on Measure A and it's quite impressive. The big difference is we are not getting paid on this issue. We've done our research and have acknowledged that our elected officials have an agenda that clearly does NOT put our city and community first. It's pretty hard to believe they will negotiate with strength when shockingly all our elected officials (except Brand) are disturbingly chummy with AES. That is precisely why no negotiations have taken place to date and the only negotiation will be how many condos will the city get to build on that land. Regarding Bill Brand, the majority of attacks against him are with false statements. His constituents respect him because he does his research and tells the truth. It may not be popular to be an honest politician but Bill Brand can take the attacks and his reputation is based on his character. All that matters is that District 2 families trust him. He has done an excellent job and has kept his promises. We are wise enough to know that we do not need the incoming Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce (biggest & most powerful special interest group in Redondo) representing developers rather than our families. Michael Jackson will have far too much conflict on whether he should vote to protect residents (which would mean against himself w/ the Chamber) or vote to protect the Chamber (himself) & harm residents. History reveals that's a dangerous position.
sheri patterson February 17, 2013 at 02:54 AM
Correction DR, AES and our "too cozy" elected officials are against Measure A. Other "paid" mouthpieces oppose Measure A. Everything has a price for some. And Redondo's biggest special interest groups (The Chamber and Big Establishment) are protecting AES. Who else supports AES? Not surprising at all but...ALL the former commissioners and councilman that were HUGE supporters of Heart of the City have all come out from hiding and they are all now supporting AES. Wow, that 38 acres of "mixed use" available land on the AES site has brought out all the characters in this town. Oh don't forget Diels the latest face of their mailer...the one that took money from AES and they donated a park in his district. He lovingly supports AES. What an interesting group of leaders all supporting AES. Residents already stopped the nightmare planning those characters wanted to force on Redondo residents with Heart of the City's 3000 condo plan. Please note: the legacy there is the effort of residents stopping the madness....just like right now. The legacy will be the residents once again stopping the madness of another power plant spewing 500% more pollution and continuing to blight our community for 50 more years. YES on A is the sweet, sweet way for residents to say NO THANK YOU. No thank you special interest. No thank you AES. No thank you Chamber. No thank you Developers. No thank you untrustworthy elected officials. YES on A will be our sweet way of saying "We aren't fools".
sheri patterson February 17, 2013 at 03:18 AM
DR, the citizens of Redondo Beach have raised over $100,000 from over 500 families because they believe in the character of Bill Brand and Jim Light. Here's a thought for you--- the No on A sites, the Huey site, Kilroy's site--- all the talking mouthpieces for AES against Measure A have all deleted posts by residents putting forth honest, well researched and legally solid data to facilitate discussion on the truth of Measure A. The unfortunate reality is that the No on A camp cannot win the debate honestly. So they silence the commentary. They will only prevail on this Measure by deceiving the people of Redondo Beach. That is so apparent as none of you can back up any of the negative claims you post about Measure A lawsuits or costing millions. None of these claims are factual. They are baseless claims geared to ignite emotion and scare residents. It's no wonder why local attorneys, doctors, engineers and PhD's are all running to the YES on A team? They can see who is telling the truth and they all care about their fellow neighbors being deceived. And just like with Measure UU, AES will feel zero shame prevailing by means of deceit. Here's an interesting truth--The most threatening candidates are those that cannot be bought-- hence all the attacks on Brand and Light. Yes, they are the brilliant guys analyzing the reports & flawed traffic studies that City Hall characters try to push through quietly against the wishes of residents.
sheri patterson February 17, 2013 at 03:29 AM
Now paid AES consultant Mirassou is an attorney. John, explain why the heat got too much for you all when a local attorney requested supporting info from the No on A side. He was polite and repeatedly asked if the No on A camp would cite one case or any legally justifying data to support the "millions in lawsuit" claim. He is in the business, did all the research, put hours into his research and could not get any of you to respond with a single piece of legally supporting information to back up any of your scare tactics. Then y'all deleted all his posts so other residents are not able to read his telling research and start questioning the huge scam you all are pulling on Redondo voters. Measure A is on firm legal ground. There is case law supporting it. There is no reason if AES is denied a permit to repower why they would not sit down and negotiate with the city. Statistics show that is exactly how the majority of these scenarios work out. Every single one of the retired power plant stories along the coast of California started out with firm action by the cities. Not elected officials playing footsies with the power plant company they were supposed to be negotiation with. Back your argument up with real data like Jim does and you may find more support.
sheri patterson February 17, 2013 at 03:38 AM
Kelly, just curious..are you posting this from AES' Headquarters in Virginia or from their fancy PR firms' office? The more you post...the more residents will vote Yes on Measure A and will quickly see that Brand and LIght are the guys to trust. Thank you, Kelly! Your posts are music to my ears. :-)
Michael David Cobb Bowen February 19, 2013 at 07:50 AM
How restrictive can zoning be? When I look at the precedents of Citywalk and LA Live, obviously tainted examples based upon presumed interests of maximizing traffic and revenue, I am vaguely aware of architectural designs that must pass some committee approval. Is the emnity between parties so great that such collaboration is highly unlikely? Also, lurking in the back of my mind is a question of whether or not the price is right owes to the zoning proponents as well. I understand the limiting of pollution argument as stick, but I'm wary of the increase of tax revenues with proper zoning carrot. Why can't supporters of A (for a lack of a better term) make their zoning provisions generate huge amounts of tax revenue for the city? Is there something in place that devalues the property and thus the tax revenue?
David Mallen February 19, 2013 at 11:11 PM
Basically, our Supreme Court does not require a city to pay a landowner for “taking” private property unless zoning diminishes the value of land by more than 85-90%. (See Brace v. U.S. (2006) 72 Fed. Ct. 337). Not even AES is claiming that. Mr. Mirassou, if you advised your client of what you just posted, you would be sued for malpractice and lose your home and your shirt. Land-use attorneys ridicule threats of a lawsuit by AES & Friends. AES cannot sue until a land use permit has been denied in 2020 or after. AES will not sue even because winning a "takings" case on these facts is about as likely as seeing a Leprechaun.
David Mallen February 19, 2013 at 11:16 PM
Voters need not fear Measure A because: • It requires the City to purchase absolutely nothing. It allows AES to sell its land to anyone for the highest market price. • Its definition of “open space” may include profitable “open space” such as: public recreation, sports facilities, an amphitheater, landscaped rest and viewing areas, walkways, public service amenities and parks. • Its 60-40 zoning mix is endorsed by legal and land-use experts. • It is flexible enough for zoning variances by City Council and revisions to the zoning mix by a vote of the people. It gives private developers several years to create a great vision for our City. Zoning of coastal land must balance a good return on private investment with population density, parking limits, health hazards, and quality of life. Measure A promotes this balance. Neighbors are free to disagree. What I don't want is for neighbors to vote no because of AES & Friends threatening lawsuits. AES is "shouting fire in a crowded theater", knowing that a "fire"cannot possibly occur until 2020, and knowing that the chances of winning a "firefight" are between highly slim and none. I'll stake my legal name and reputation on that. And give you case law to back it up. Vote how you want. Don't buy "fear."
David Mallen February 19, 2013 at 11:19 PM
Mr. Bowen: Great question. I am not a developer, but I would imagine that 20 acres of prime coastal land upzoned for commercial use will generate tens of millions of dollars for the City of Redondo Beach. This is the type of conversation we should be having instead of combating threats of bogus lawsuits and other fear tactics. The 60-40 open space to commercial mix balances a reasonable investment-backed expectation of the landowner and the laws of the Coastal Commission and the unique character of coastal land.
David Mallen February 19, 2013 at 11:22 PM
Mr. Mirassou: I have read cases upholding a zoning mix of 80 % open space to 20% commercial space. Measure A is 60-40. I spend most of my work hours representing companies and employees in workplace issues, but it only took me about 20-30 hours of research and talking with land use attorneys' to get a basic handle on zoning. What kind of law do you practice, sir? Email me if you like: David@MallenMediation.com. We can continue the discussion. Or, call my cell phone: 310.895.0107. I am interested in learning why you seem confused. Cheers, Neighbor.
Jim Light February 26, 2013 at 06:14 PM
Not sure what you are asking Michael. Measure A zoning allows the same density of development as the harbor area. That is up to 433,000 sq feet of development, which would generate more city revenues than the $365K AES generates today for the city. The City estimates the 45 room Shade Hotel would generate $550K per year of the city... so just one boutique hotel on the site would generate more than AES does on 50 waterfront acres today. Plus, with the blighting impacts removed, surrounding business revenues and property values would go up further increasing City revenunes.
Jim Light February 26, 2013 at 06:16 PM
Yes the AFL CIO wants their 20 permanent positions for the whole power plant and the temporary construction jobs. This is short sighted and robs Redondo of hundreds of permanent jobs.
David Mallen March 03, 2013 at 04:12 AM
From a conversation I had this morning with one of the finest coastal land-use attorneys in California: "If AES is foolish enough to sue after Measure A passes, the Court will dismiss the AES case within a few months and order AES to pay the City's attorneys' fees under the anti-SLAPP laws of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16."
David Mallen March 03, 2013 at 04:12 AM
From a conversation I had this morning with one of the finest coastal land-use attorneys in California: "If AES is foolish enough to sue after Measure A passes, the Court will dismiss the AES case within a few months and order AES to pay the City's attorneys' fees under the anti-SLAPP laws of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16."
Wolfman March 24, 2013 at 04:52 PM
Facebook, Aol,Huffpost,and now Patch just delete posts they don't agree with is Un American


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