I have good news! In addition to the other infrastructure bonds, a new park bond (link below) is going to qualify for the November ballot - pending verification of the signatures gathered. The last park bond was Proposition 50 in 2002, for $3.44 billion. This bond is $5.4 billion, with a portion of it slated for projects such as Heart Park. A few local examples of areas that benefited from past bonds of this type is Ballona Wetlands ($149 million), Ahmanson Ranch ($150 million) and the Portuguese Bend Preserve ($14 million).

So how can the South Bay qualify for some of this funding if approved?

1. By hiring the Conservation Strategies Group consultants to lobby for our project. They authored Proposition 50, and this latest one as well.

2. By mounting the long term political effort required to make this happen.

This is a political process, and our leaders need to direct their city staffs to hire the lobbyists, engage experts like the Coastal Conservancy (which Redondo Beach is doing), and continue to build enthusiasm and support for this once in a lifetime opportunity. Not just a couple soccer fields as an accoutrement to more condos, hotels and shops, but a restored wetland with walking trails, an aquatic center, interpretive/educational center, native gardens, in addition to the active recreational areas such as ball fields and skate park that we so desperately need. We live in a 'park poor' community and this site represents a once in a generational opportunity to do something really special.

I call on all of you to challenge YOURSELVES and your elected leaders to make this happen. It's easy for them to say it's too expensive, a 'pipedream', or AES doesn't want to sell. But hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent by South Bay citizens on parks and open space elsewhere in the state. It's our turn, but it's up to your elected representatives and the rest of us to make this happen.

Other areas have been successful by following the two steps above. So can we! I'm not suggesting you send a letter or email, although that will be important at times, but just to go forth with the notion that this needs to happen. No excuses. In your day to day lives and as you talk to friends and neighbors, pass on the simple fact that this is what needs to happen here.

The alternative is a new power plant or a big development plan, neither of which is acceptable to the community. No, the only effort that has wide public support and can be financially feasible is a park, and we owe it to ourselves and all the future generations to make this happen.

Bill Brand

President

South Bay Parkland Conservancy

PO Box 7000-408

Redondo Beach, CA 90277

310-809-4405

www.southbayparks.org

http://www.cleanwater2006.com/

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_j_051006.htm#2006General

1185. (SA2005RF0131)

Water Quality, Safety and Supply. Flood Control. Natural Resource Protection. Park Improvements. Bonds. Initiative Statute.
Summary Date: 01/27/06 Circulation Deadline: 06/26/06 Signatures Required: 373,816
Proponent: Stephen J. Kaufman (213) 452-6565

Authorizes $5,388,000,000 in general obligation bonds, payable from the state's General Fund, to fund projects relating to safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, waterway and natural resource protection, water pollution and contamination control, state and local park improvements, public access to natural resources, and conservation efforts. Provides funding for emergency drinking water, and exempts such expenditures from public contract and procurement requirements to ensure immediate action for public safety. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: State cost of about $10.5 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($5.4 billion) and interest ($5.1 billion) costs on the bonds. Payments of about $350 million per year. Reduction in local property tax revenues of several million dollars annually, about one-half of which would be offset by state payments to schools to make up their revenue loss. Unknown costs, potentially tens of millions of dollars per year, to state and local governments to operate or maintain properties or projects acquired or developed with these bond funds. (SA2005RF0131.)