Should the City of Long Beach spend over $103 million, tapping roughly $60 million in Tidelands (shoreline area) funds but without telling taxpayers its total cost and what public funds would be spent to fund it, to build an attention-getting national-competition-level "Aquatics Center" on the SE LB shoreline site of the former Belmont Plaza Pool?

The battle pits LB's large, well-connected and deeply-rooted Aquatics community against a number of opponents that city officialdom have tried to swat down but have grown more legally and politically sophisticated approaching the 2018 election cycle when five Council seats plus citywide offices will be on the ballot.

[Scroll down for further.]

The battlelines are visible on social networks.

Project supporters recently used their Facebook page at RebuildBelmontPlazaPool to cheer a December 2016 Planning Commission decision that narrowly allowed city staff to let a single "story pole" (photo right) represent the height and size of the full facility (after city officials triggered a delay by scheduling a hearing without any story poles (plural) that under LB's Municipal Code.are supposed to [text] "accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure" )

The Rebuild supportive Facebook page stated: "The appeal was a time and money wasting effort by some folks that are not in favor of rapidly improving our community facilitates. Let the pool project continue! Long Beach is known for being the "Aquatic Capital of America" and the Belmont Pool is an important part of keeping that true. Thank You Planning Committee for voting in favor to deny this appeal." As for the taxpayer/resident who filed the appeal: "For a $100 filing fee, one person, in this case Jeff Miller, can further delay the approval process, and potentially cost the City an additional $100,000 before his appeal is resolved. Perhaps the City should either charge a significantly higher filing fee, or add to its approval process that the if an appeal is denied, the appellant pays all additional costs resulting from delays caused by such frivolous appeals."

Sponsor

Sponsor

Meanwhile, an independent shoreline area advocate, Gordana Kajer, has recently launched "BelmontPOOLitics" on Facebook at this link that covers a number of opposition points:

"We want to say that we respect the individuals that are working to get this pool built. They love their sport, they love our city, and want the best for both. We won't personally attack these people and wish they would say the same. We love Long Beach, too. We think this pool is a mistake for our city and its residents. It's $45 million over budget (turns out building on sand is a little spendy), in addition to draining the Tidelands fund of $58m. The complex design is clearly more for athletes than residents. The $45 million overage alone could pay for TWO state-of-the-art pools on solid ground in underserved districts in Long Beach. We're advocating not just for a small group of elite athletes, but for kids in the 7th, 8th, for residents all over town. Give us beautiful community pools and the important coastal infrastructure Tidelands is intended for."

And BelmontPOOLitics includes a advocacy graphics (below)...

...and invites visitors to add their name to an online petition urging LB's City Auditor (also part of the 2018 election cycle) to review the budget, location and policy behind the proposed pool rebuild.

Sponsor Computer Repair Long Beach

Sponsor

Others who oppose the project as currently proposed include the above-referenced Jeff Miller, no-relation Belmont Shore resident Susan Miller (who argues that leaving the area as-is provides new shoreline area parkland), longtime Belmont Shore community advocate Melinda Cotton and ELB resident/citywide park/environmental advocate Ann Cantrell. In addition, the Long Beach Area Peace Action Network has joined in on its Facebook page: "Let's rethink the $103 million Belmont Beach and Aquatics Center!...[T]his Money Pit...favors the most entitled at the expense of the most vulnerable. It violates the city's Healthy Communities Policy which prioritizes "health equity" and states that "neighborhoods with historic barriers to health, wellness, and safety" will be first to have new recreational facilities. A community pool costs about $12 million. Eight community pools could be built for less money than the Belmont Beach and Aquatics Center."

With opposition now visible on several fronts, project supporters advised their Facebook page readers: "All the more reason to request your attendance at the Planning Commission meeting on March 2 (5:00 p.m. at City Hall)," drawing an online response from Ms. Kajer: "WOW! Thanks for sharing all those FB links and help get everybody's opinion about this project get out into the community!" to which Rebuild Belmont Plaza Pool shot back, "Now how about if you post our FB link on your pages? We have had information about this project out in the community for 4 years now." Ms. Kajer replied: "We're doing what we can and hope to have even more information out in the public in the next few weeks. Stay tuned!"

Sponsor

Sponsor

Rebuild Belmont Plaza Pool recently advised its supporters via Facebook: "A big turnout of our supporters would help show the Commission that we are eager to see the new facility permitted ASAP! Please attend the meeting - wear aquatic gear - t-shirts, jackets, etc. for maximum visibility to the Commissioners." Aquatics supporters have argued that rebuilding the pool (officially an Aquatics Center for its many features and amenities) at the SE LB location will enable major swim meets and competitive events that will draw visitors, produce revenue and build Long Beach's reputation as an Aquatics Capital.

Image via City of LB Power Point

Looking west from spectator seating. Image via City of LB Power Point

Looking south from 10 meter diving platform. Image via City of LB Power Point

View from the beach, looking east. Image via City of LB Power Point

View from Belmont Pier parking lot. Image via City of LB Power Point

Image via City of LB Power Point

LBREPORT.com plans to provide LIVE video coverage of the Planning Commission proceeding on our front page starting at 5:00 p.m. on March 2.

Sponsor