top of page




Beach Cities Health District is working with a private developer, owner and operator PMB LLC to finalize their application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Design Review to the City of Redondo Beach. According to BCHD sources, they plan to submit anywhere in the 1st to 2nd quarter 2023. 

The controversial project then goes to a new decision maker: the Redondo Beach Planning Commission. For the first time in this multi-year process, the BCHD Board will not be approving the project.

Next steps: The Redondo Beach Planning Commission will schedule hearings to review the project and get public input. They will decide  whether the project complies with Redondo Beach municipal code and design guidelines that include compatibility with neighborhood character, mass and scale. The project cannot move forward, as proposed without approval.


Note: BCHD may also need permits from the City of Torrance for grading work on Torrance property that runs along the eastern border of the project.

A few things to know:

  • In the 65 to 95 year ground lease to PMB, PMB (or their LLC) would develop, own and operate the massive RCFE project. They would have 100% ownership – BCHD has 0% ownership. 

  • BCHD would PAY MORE to "lease back" a small portion of the nearly 300,000 sq. ft. structure for their own admin offices and for a youth center (allcove - currently funded by a grant) than they would receive from the PMB for 3 acres of PUBLIC LAND

  • As currently planned, the city block-long RCFE structure would tower 100 ft. over surrounding homes in Torrance and Redondo Beach. It is currently proposed at 83 ft. high on the edge of the 30- ft. elevated site along Beryl and Flagler Lane.

  • Due to the height of the structure, construction noise would EXCEED federal thresholds, causing “Significant” impacts to surrounding residents (Ref: HLC EIR).

  • The massive structure and 24/7 operations on the elevated site would PERMANENTLY damage the quality of life 





Who Endorses Candace Nafissi for City Council?
Redondo Beach Firefighters & Police Officers Association
Our Congressman 
L.A. County Supervisors Janice Hahn and Holly Mitchell
Mayor Bill Brand

“Commissioner Candace Nafissi is the most qualified candidate for the Redondo Beach City Council, District 3. Her leadership serving in various roles is outstanding. She will be ready to serve on day one."

-Congressman Ted Lieu

“I am delighted to endorse Candace Nafissi for Redondo Beach City Council. Having appointed her to the L.A. County Beaches and Harbors Commission, and worked with her implementing the Community Resource Center in Wilmington, I saw her depth of knowledge and deeply ingrained dedication to be of service to her City and her Community, firsthand. She is a thorough, charismatic yet fierce advocate with a remarkable resume that adds to her effectiveness as a great leader."

-L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn &
2nd Vice Chair of LA Metro Board of Directors


“We need leaders who are inclusive and committed to equity. Candace has a firm grasp on the complex issues impacting Redondo Beach constituents and is persistently engaged in identifying solutions to meet their needs. I proudly endorse Candace Nafissi for Redondo Beach City Council."

-L.A. County Supervisor Holly Mitchell



Candace Nafissi for Redondo Beach City Council - District 3



An experienced Redondo Beach Commissioner, ready to serve on day one


It's important to elect a Councilmember with experience and a record of advocating for residents and serving our community.


Candace Nafissi is a lifetime South Bay resident and longtime resident of Redondo Beach. A vigorous advocate for residents, she is the candidate with a proven track record of public service, civic leadership, and a deep commitment to improving our quality of life in Redondo Beach.

  • Endorsed by Redondo Beach Firefighters and Police Officers Association

  • Currently a Redondo Beach Public Works Commissioner and past service on Historical and Library  Commissions

  • Dedicated to public service and civic leadershipMasters in Public Administration


Vote by March 7!

Candace for City Council

Mail in, or drop off ballots at:

Main Library, North Library, Dominguez Park

“Your concerns are my number one priority and motivation to protect our most beloved asset:

our quality of life.“


- Candace Allen Nafissi







Easy Reader published a cover article about BCHD’s controversial and massive project to privatize public land, which provides some of the opposition's views. Take a moment to read “Campus Clash: Healthy Living Campus draws flak in Redondo Beach”.


As always, thank you for helping to protect our neighborhood and community. We wish you the very best this holiday season.



Read Easy Reader editorial Sandbox – Health Living Campus needs a health exam for a summary of issues with BCHD's massive and incompatible project, as they get ready to submit a final application to the City of Redondo Beach sometime next year.


The BCHD Board approved a largely content-free Design Build contract with Suffolk Construction that leaves many key questions unanswered at a Special Board Meeting on 12/13/22.

Just days before their ability to use Design Build expired, BCHD adopted a resolution to sign on Suffolk Construction and immediately turned the contract over to its private developer PMB, who was designated as the Owner.

Design Build allows the BCHD to select a builder without going out to bid. Simply put, 5 years after Al Muratsuchi passed the statute allowing its use, BCHD is pushing forward with empty contracts without a final project approved. BCHD has not yet applied for its required final Conditional Use Permit and Design Review, the final project has NOT BEEN approved by the City of Redondo Beach.


  • 9 OF 14 exhibits which make up the contract are placeholders with "to be added by amendment" with no exhibits for key detailed items such as pre-construction cost, design, and schedule. 

  • BCHD has little to no control. "Time is of the essence" clause for build timelines and built-in late schedule penalties leave the public little confidence. Who will monitor the builder?

  • The Board has basically abdicated its role and given  authority to the CEO and CFO to "execute, deliver and consummate" the design build agreement, which further obscures important project actions from the public purview.

  • "RESOLUTION NO. 586 includes:"Redevelopment of the campus as contemplated by the proposed Project will require significant resources, financial and otherwise, including incurring substantial risk."'





TUES., 12/13/22 AT 6:00 P.M.

In Person: 

Large Conference Room, 1200 Del Amo St. (Redondo Union High Trailer) 



III. New Business Discussion and Potential Action Item:
Staff is recommending the Board adopt Resolution #586 of the Board of Directors of the Beach Cities Health District authorizing the District’s execution of the A141 Design-Build Agreement and related Assignment and Assumption Agreement in connection with the development of the Phase 1 of the Healthy Living Campus project.
BCHD - Resolution #586 re Approval of A141.pdf
Assignment and Assumption Agreement.pdf A141-2014
BCHD Final with Exhibits_2022.12.05.pdf BCHD BOD
Staff Memo_A141 Contract Assignment Assumption Resoltuion #586.pdf
As we head into the holiday weekend, we want to take a moment to give thanks to the many residents who have come together to protect our community and families. 
We hope you are able to spend some time with family and friends and reflect on what you cherish most.
As of 11/23  7,714 of informed voters chose Mike Martin and his platform of change and reform. Thank you for standing up for residents and taking a stand against bad governance, improper use of public land for a damaging project.
Excerpt from ER Article  Incumbents Bholat, Chun, Challenger Martin vie for two BCHD Board seats.

Mike Martin, Challenger

Mike Martin is a first-time candidate for the Beach Cities Health District Board.

The retired systems engineer/manager, with a PHd from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, now serves on the BCHD property advisory committee. He spent much of his career working with Boeing defense contracts – under accompanying federal rules and regulations.

He questions how the Beach Cities Health District came to stay in existence after its founding mission to build a hospital ended in 1998, with the closing of South Bay Hospital. 

“The hospital failed and the government agency kept on going. Just on the principle of government bureaucracy should continue forever,” Martin said. “If you follow the money, it’s really a real estate empire funded by (property) taxes. It’s an example of bad governance.”

Martin said he would like to see term limits for BCHD board members, and for them to represent districts rather than serve “at-large.”

He questions the work BCHD does and how it is funded.

“The stuff they do is more akin to social work, which is fine, but I don’t need a government agency to do that,” he said. “I would take a look at exactly what they are doing. They should go out and get grants for their funding. None of this is easy, by the way.”

Martin also suggests BCHD would be better as a public health department, similar to Pasadena’s. 

He contends the board is not listening to public opposition against The Healthy Living Campus.

“Because they don’t have to,” Martin said. “The internal mandate is to self-perpetuate and even grow. My reading is that the board is captive to the staff. I think that they think they know better, they think they’re doing good. In the diplomatic corps, they call it going native.”

Martin is against the Campus.

“It is a highly inappropriate use of public land. Beach Cities resident quality of life should always take first priority,” he said. “Revenue generation to support an entrenched bureaucracy should never be treated as the prime directive.”

He comes back to the original BCHD mission and how it relates to now.

“The voters gave the Beach Cities Health District one job: give us a hospital. When the hospital was done, the district should’ve been done too,” he said. “In the ’50s, they didn’t know to include a sunset provision. To ask, ‘what if it fails?’” ER"

See why it's important to have BOARD members committed to TRANSPARENCY.
See the current and long-time BCHD Board culture and what incumbents running for the Board have proliferated in their HLC project.

BCHD Board of Directors

When you think no one is listening the truth comes out. At their 4/26/17 BoD meeting, the Board went over the guiding principles for the HLC. Vanessa Poster suggests using "better words" when discussing the project in public. Noel Chun (running for re-election) suggests leaving out the finances. The rest is history.

Click on video:


West Torrance Residents,

Come and meet your newly appointed District 2 City Councilmember Bridgett Lewis.

Wed. Oct 19 at 7:00 p.m.

In person: Bert Lynn Cafeteria


Register to participate online at :





TRAO strongly endorses Michael “Mike” Martin for Beach Cities Health District Board of Directors in the upcoming Nov. 8, 2022 election. 


Mike Martin enters the race at a critical point for the public district, as they move forward on a costly, controversial for-profit project on public land. Two long-time BCHD Board members are up for re-election. Both have a long history of rubber-stamping BCHD’s bloated bureaucracy and the damaging project.


Mike is a 35-year Redondo Beach resident and quality-of-life advocate. An opponent of BCHD’s plan for the HLC for-profit project, he would be an independent voice for much-needed fiscal and public accountability on the board.  


He brings a blend of program management, business strategy/planning and system engineering expertise from a series of diverse leadership positions in aerospace including Chief Technologist and Tech Fellow. He holds a Doctorate in Engineering and a Master of Business Administration, among other degrees from MIT. He currently serves as an appointed advisor on BCHD’s Properties Committee.


See Mike Martin’s Priorities and Background information Voter's Edge here .

See Mike's campaign statement here.


Spread the word to ALL voters in Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach. You can change the dynamic of the Board.  


Vote for ONE candidate only - Mike Martin – the only one committed to working for you. 

The BCHD Board approved giving the CEO authority to finalize a contract and transfer 3 acres of public land to private developers PMB/Watermark in a largely incomplete ground lease contract. The "deal" turns over control to the private parties to develop, own and operate a massive RCFE on public land before a project goes before the Redondo Beach Planning Commission for a conditional use permit and Design Review.
Next up, the CEO states the design-build contract to bring on a builder is expected to come before the Board for approval at their Oct. 26 meeting.

BCHD Board Meeting - to give CEO power to finalize contract with private developer

WED., SEPT 28 at 6:30 P.M.

Virtual and in person 

1200 Del Amo St. (Redondo Union High site)

See Agenda and Zoom link here

Up for approval - a Board vote to give the CEO the authority to finalize a contract and transfer 3 acres of public land to private developers PMB/Watermark in a ground lease contract. This is a lose-lose contract on many levels.
  • Private developer will OWN the massive high-priced RCFE
  • BCHD gives up control to the private developer/owner/operator for 65 to 95 years (to the year 2087 up to 2117)
  • According to the Cain presentation, BCHD may pay more to the developer in rent than the nominal amount it would receive in the the lease, to lease back BCHD's space for offices (ref. below).
Make your opposition known. Initiating the premature ground lease with the private developer without an approved project, and with a multitude of project uncertainties and allowing the CEO authority to "finalize, execute, and deliver" a contract carte blanche is waives any fiduciary responsibility, and reduces transparency for the public and other decision-makers.
A simple statement opposing this damaging proposed use of our public land to private developers is all that's needed.
  • Send comments to and other decision-makers:    Subj: Public Comments for upcoming meeting;​​

  • E-comments on the agenda can be provided here.

  • To speak, simply join the meeting and raise your hand during Public Comments or Agenda item VIII.B. FINANCE COMMITTEE.

Contract here and CAIN Brothers presentation here:

Excerpts from Cain Brothers presentation - 9/26/22

How can the Board let the CEO proceed with all of this undefined?

  1. BCHD would receive $1.5M annually in ground lease.

  2. BCHD pays out $1.5M plus annually to Developer/Owner to rent out space.


Who's on first?

BCHD is a public entity and steward of public land that has specific and limited permitted uses.  Simple, direct.  Yet, as shown in Cain Bros. presentation, who will own what?  Who will be responsible for ensuring the public is protected and the land is used for only legal purposes?  Why the complexity?  What does BCHD have to hide?









Los Angeles (LA) LAFCO Review and Hearing of BCHD 

Municipal Services Review – Virtual Meeting

Wed., Sept. 14 at 9:00 a.m.

A Municipal Services Review (MSR) of Beach Cities Health District by LA LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Committee) is scheduled for Wed. Sept.14, at 9:00 a.m.

LAFCO Agenda and Review Package at:

8/19/22 -
BCHD plans a special BCHD Board Meeting on Thurs., 9/8/22 to sign a contract with private developer PMB and Watermark. More details on the contract will be available prior to the meeting. Agenda will be posted here when available.
8/8/22 -
The BCHD Board approved a resolution at its special BCHD Board Meeting on Mon., 8/8/22 to select the private developer and builder. BCHD is now finalizing the contract with a private developer/owner/operator and builder.
As stated in their resolution:
 " e. Redevelopment of the campus as contemplated by the proposed Project will require significant resources, financial and otherwise, including incurring substantial risk and investing capital sufficient to fund the next phases of the Project."
See ways to TAKE ACTION
7/27/22 -

No surprise at July 27 BCHD Board meeting. Despite hearing 75% of potential bidders DROPPED OUT early in the bid process, citing serious and real concerns about the proposed project, the Board of Directors had no questions. The majority of potential bidders cited major concerns with critical elements of the project.

Topping the list:

Financial Feasibility

Flaws in RCFE Building Design

Complexity and scope of the project


Nine of 12 bidders dropped out after learning more about the project,  including their current business associates Silverado and Sunrise.








The BCHD Board and consultant Cain Bros. went on to review the ONLY 3 developers left who submitted a proposal. Terms of the recommended private Developer/Owner/Operator (DOO) bid were reviewed.


According to the Cain Bros. presentation:

  • Developer would lease the land and OWN 100% of the proposed ~300,000 sq. ft. structure atop approx. 3 acres of land - including BCHD admin offices, the Youth Center and PACE for a total of 95 years (65 years + two 15-year additions).

  • BCHD would have NO ownership of the structure

  • Developer would pay $1,500,000 in a land lease AFTER full occupancy is reached, or begin payments in 2028, whatever comes first. They would charge BCHD $822,669 for BCHD to lease out their own offices, the Youth Center, and PACE space. Total back to BCHD is $677,331 annually.

  • Private developer factored a 94% occupancy rate for their high-priced assisted living and memory care. National occupancy rates for assisted living are currently ~77.8% (Ref: NIC data 1Q 2022).


A special Board Meeting is currently scheduled for Mon., Aug. 8 at 6:30 p.m. for the BCHD to approve a contract with the recommended developer team of PMB, Watermark, and builder Suffolk and Callison RTKL. 

7/23/22 -


BCHD just released their plan to select a private developer for their massive Phase 1 RCFE. They will review the developer/owner/operator selection at the Board Meeting on Wed. 7/27 and likely take action on a developer contract at a special Board meeting on Mon. 8/8.  Upcoming meetings to note are:


  • Board of Directors Meeting - Wed. 7/27 at 6:30 p.m.  -  Agenda

  • Special Board of Directors Meeting (likely vote to award a developer contract)  -  Mon. 8/8 at 6:30 p.m.

Cain Bros. financial advisors, will present developer data and recommendations in their report. Read their report here.  


75% of developers who responded to the RFP, chose NOT to bid!

Of the 12 bidders who answered their Request for Proposal, nine (9) took themselves out, including BCHD’s current businesses Silverado and Sunrise Senior Living [Ref. Cain Brothers presentation dated 7/25/22.]

See bidders who pulled out here.

























Only three bids came in, which comprise their top 3 and ONLY candidates. All have requested changes to the project terms. The recommendation from the BCHD “advisory” group is to contract with PMB LLC & Watermark.

BCHD is tying its fate to a highly leveraged, risk-ridden, several hundred million dollar project.

You can join the meeting, ask questions, give verbal or written comments here.

6/22/22 - June Board Meeting 
According to the CEO, a contract with a private developer/owner/operator is still in the works and may come before the  board at the July 27 Board of Directors meeting. 
$10M of taxpayer funds has already been spent on"pre-development" of the HLC in consultant fees: lawyers, EIR consultants, architect, Financial firm to seek out a private developer and PR campaigns over and above their $1M communications budget.
No review of their Fiscal year 22/23 budget.

BCHD Board Meeting - (virtual and in person

WED., JUNE 22 at 6:30 P.M.

See Agenda and Zoom link here

Here’s a brief HLC update from the CEO Report:

The meeting will include the approval of their Fiscal year 22/23 budget.


“Healthy Living Campus (HLC): We are finalizing recommendations regarding partners for the Residential Care for the Elderly (RCFE) and Program for All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), and plan to present public subcommittee recommendations to the public standing Committees in midJuly and the full Board at the end of July. We then hope to submit the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application to the City of Redondo Beach in the Fall. ” 

You can make verbal public comments by raising your hand in the zoom meeting or attending in person. Written public comments can be mailed to or E-comments can be provided on agenda items here.*

*NOTE - BCHD has chosen to deter public comment by NOT reading comments into the record. Your comments will still be part of the record. 


BCHD Board Meeting (virtual and in person)

Wed., 5/25 at 6:30 p.m.

See Agenda and Zoom link

From the CEO Report
A few updates:
  • BCHD is in process of selecting a private developer/owner/operator with an agendized approval by the Board planned for their June BoD meeting.

  • In his CEO Report, Bakaly states "a certified and unchallenged Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was submitted as part of the CUP preapplication...". Of course, not mentioned is nearly 3,000 pages of opposition to the self-certified EIR findings were recorded. 

  • City of Redondo Beach Planning Department provided feedback on BCHD's pre-application for the conditional use permit (CUP) 

  • BCHD expects to "complete" their CUP application this "summer".

You can make verbal public comments by raising your hand in the zoom meeting or attending in person.

Written public comments can be mailed to or E-comments can be provided on agenda items here.*


*NOTE - BCHD has chosen to deter public comment by NOT reading comments into the record. Your comments will still be part of the record. 



Important: in a major reversal of their public comment process, BCHD will NOT be reading written public comments into the record.


According to BCHD:

 "Written comments will not be read into the record. They will be provided to the Board members and will be on file with the District and available for review."  


You can provide VERBAL comments by joining the Zoom meeting (or in person) and "raising your hand" to speak or calling in by phone at public comments or on any agenda item. Written comments can be sent to and you can copy other elected officials.

Details to join the meeting here

Screen Shot 2022-07-23 at 6.03.50 PM.png
Screen Shot 2022-09-26 at 10.28.32 AM.png
Screen Shot 2022-07-23 at 5.26.47 PM.png
Screen Shot 2022-09-26 at 11.15.31 AM.png
Screen Shot 2022-09-26 at 11.26.20 AM.png
Screen Shot 2022-10-23 at 1.23.33 PM.png
Screen Shot 2022-10-23 at 1.34.34 PM.png

BCHD Board Meeting - Wed. 1/26 at 6:30 p.m.

Agenda and Virtual Meeting links


It’s important to be aware of what’s happening with the HLC Project and the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that is required from the City of Redondo Beach for the project. 


A few important milestones as reported in the 1/21/22, CEO report. 


  • New monthly status report from consultant CBRE starts on page 36.

  • BCHD’s request for proposal (RFP) for commercial developers went out on 12/9/21, with a tentative due date for responses inFeb. 

  • A “Pre-Application” for the CUP is scheduled to go to the Redondo Beach Planning Department on 1/31/22, starting the process.. 

  • CUP public hearings for the HLC for the Planning Commission (and anticipated City Council) are tentatively being planned in the third and 4th quarter of  2022.


Meeting Agenda action items (VIII) include:

  • A contract for Targeted Technologies, a marketing consultant specializing in social media to promote the HLC

  • A contract for Converse Consultants for additional soils analysis needed for the CUP application.


(Note: A Board Study Session on Health Priorities begins at 5:00 p.m.)

You can send written comments to by 5:00 p.m. on Wed. to be read into the record and forward to elected officials

Update on BCHD Project and Next Steps

A huge thanks to everyone who stands against BCHD's proposed massive building project. Any effort to oppose this project is necessary and worthwhile. Over the years, including at the Nov. 17 BCHD Board meeting, many of you continued to voice your concerns.  Taking action that supports the opposition helps protect your community's health and welfare.


BCHD approved their "Healthy Living Campus Master Plan"

on November 17, including adopting CEQA Findings and Overriding Considerations. The vote was expected. BCHD self-certified their own Environmental Impact Report and has already spent nearly $9M of a $16M PRE-development budget to "secure the EIR" and try to get a Conditional Use Permit through the City of Redondo Beach. 

Video is posted here. Comments start at 1:57 min. Board discussion starts at.3:05 min.


The Board also approved an incentivized contract for "Blue Mountain Development" (whose President is a community member on BCHD’s Properties Committee) to obtain a Conditional Use Permit from Redondo Beach.


Next Steps

While the journey to this point has seemed long, BCHD is only at the beginning of the approval process. BCHD may try to convince others that their project is a "fait accompli", but in fact all they have really accomplished is spending enormous sums of money (to date they have spent more than double the amount they receive annually from your tax dollars) in order to "self approve” their project. Their latest efforts have simply removed the preliminary hurdles that CEQA imposed on their proposed project. 


BCHD now enters a different phase

The project is out of their hands and the course of the project sits with a new set of decision-makers. They will seek discretionary approvals from Planning Commissions, certainly in the City of Redondo Beach, and perhaps in Torrance. If they complete that lengthy stage of the process, they next face potential appeals to the City Councils of Redondo Beach and/or Torrance. In addition, there may well be any number of other legal hurdles for BCHD to surmount.


Your continued support of the opposition will be essential.


Upcoming Board Meeting to APPROVE the

Full-scale Alt. 3 - $450M HLC 

Wed. Nov. 17 at 6:30 p.m.

Announced as In-Person and Virtual

On the Agenda posted here.

Resolution to:

  1. Approve the full -scale Alt. 3 of the HLC project.

  2. Approve their CEQA Findings and "Overriding Considerations"

    • CEQA requires justification for "Significant" impacts they declare to be "unmitigatable", e.g., construction noise above residential thresholds for on-site and surrounding residents on all sides of site.


  • Incentivized contract for consultant to successfully get a Conditional Use Permit through Redondo Beach Planning Commission​

  • CEO's performance evaluation in closed session, prior to 6:30 p.m. start.

JOIN meeting, VOICE your concerns, ASK questions, SEND written comments.

Written comments will be read into the record. Send to before 5 p.m. You can also copy elected officials.

The last Board meeting left many questions unanswered.

The cost of the project has now inflated to $450M, an upper of 17%.

How will the HLC be financed? Cain Bros., their financial consultants now recommend a long-term lease only,  leaving little to no legal control over a new private "developer/owner/operator" - see video here.


Approving a half a billion dollar, high-risk, unnecessary project to move forward, without a clear understanding of core project principles, such as how the RCFE will be financed, who will be the private developer/owner/operator, how little control of the project BCHD will have years of demolition and construction, how likely is the project to fail... is simply irresponsible.


The BCHD Board President summed up the process of getting to their final approval best saying "the whole process is us, the public..." (click image below) to see.

Approval for staff to prepare a resolution for Alt. 3 as preferred option passes with a 3-2 Split Vote
Additional information requested and the resolution to approve the Alt. 3 for the Master Plan to be brought to the Nov. 17 Board Meeting.



Thanks to the many concerned residents who spoke and sent written comments. Your insights helped inject a dose of reality throughout the meeting that would have otherwise allowed the BCHD storyline to go unchecked.


The agenda item for staff to prepare a resolution to adopt Alternative 3 as the preferred option for the Master Plan, and approve CEQA findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations came at the end of the meeting. 


Notably, some issues were raised by two Board members. Dr. Martha Koo asked for more public input on the alternatives presented. Dr. Michelle Bholat wanted more clarity on key aspects of the project: including financial issues that have been raised - more information on a bond and public/private partnership.


The final vote was 3-2. The item did pass with a majority vote: Board members Poster, Chun, and Diehl voted to approve. Board members Koo and Bholat voted “No”, citing the need for more information, which is supposed to be addressed at their Nov. 17 Board meeting.


By the end of the meeting, Board President Jane Diehl summed up the project and the process best, stating: “this whole process has been confusing to us, the citizens, that’s why it was hard to communicate, so it continues to be a little baffling … “


The Video is now posted here:


Public verbal and written comments are throughout the meeting.

The deliberation of the Project vote starts at 1:59:40.

Virtual BCHD Board Meeting to
Request Staff to Write a
Resolution for Project Alternative 3
Wed., Oct. 27 at 6:30 p.m.

 Attend, ask questions, and share your concerns.


Important: The virtual BCHD Board Meeting agenda is now posted. The BCHD Board is set to approve project alternative 3 for the HLC at its Oct. 27 Board meeting.

See the Staff Recommendations for agenda item X.B for “Approval of Alternative 3 in the Final EIR”.


  • Alternative 3 is their full-scale project from the final EIR with Phases 1 and 2

  • Recommends a resolution adopting CEQA Findings and a "Statement of Overriding Consideration”, for significant impacts their FEIR considered “unavoidable”, e.g., construction noise over the FTA threshold for surrounding residents. 

  • They cite three BCHD consultant reports (presented in committee meetings in the last few days) interpreted to reach their own conclusions.

1. FM3 Survey - BCHD hired marketing firm FM3 to survey beach city voters on their awareness and opinion of the Healthy Living Campus. Limited information was given

that a "Healthy Living Campus" would be built. 

BCHD claims it shows "public support" for its project,,despite FM3's conclusion that only 9% of the respondees knew much about the project. After reading BCHD's narrative of "benefits and features", they say 60% were in favor of the project. This type of telemarketing opinion poll is another red flag to the public.

\veloper to develop, own and maintain the RCFE.

Out of 600 respondees (4% of the beach cities population).

  • 75% knew nothing or "very little" about the project

  • 60% knew nothing about the project

  • Only 9% knew "a lot" about the project

  • The need for Assisted Living ranked LOW in value when given project attributes to rank. 

  • TOP priorities were:

    • Using recycled water for landscaping

    • Offering comprehensive, coordinated health and wellness services for seniors so they can get the care they need while staying at their homes for as long as possible instead of moving to nursing homes

    • Offering Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly so they can get the care they need while staying at their homes instead of moving to nursing homes.

2. Seismic Report Additional Review  -Risk Analysis review of the Seismic report, at the Properties Committee meeting was challenged by several committee members as being biased to reach the conclusion BCHD wanted and NOT what the committee had requested.

3. Cain Bros new financial projections

Cain Bros. now recommends a "land lease" only to avoid a large "financial risk" that  it would be moved to the private developer. Cites the "magnitude of risk for such a large project, relative to the other programs of the district and the mission of the organization."

 BCHD consistently minimizes opposition to their project. Show elected officials that the unnecessary, hazardous project that will permanently change the South Bay is opposed by its citizens.

Join the virtual meeting, send in comments, and speak out. 


Click on image to see Project Alternatives 3.














  • Cost of project has inflated to $450M, nearly a half bill - up 17% from the stated $374M

  • Cain Bros. their financial consultants now recommends a land lease only, to "put all the risk on the private developer to avoid financial risk to the district" for  a project of this magnitude. So what happens if it gets built and FAILS?  Permanent damage to surrounding neighbors and the South Bay landscape.  

  • The project alternatives do NOT consider many of the mitigatable impacts cited by the Responsible Agencies: the cities of Torrance and Redondo Beach, and the public including, increased setbacks, reduced height and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods and BCHD's project objectives.

  • Noise ABOVE the EIR thresholds are now NOT considered a factor in the project selection and will be waived as "Overriding Considerations"

  • Extreme height and mass of RCFE, BCHD inflated their height of building to 103 ft. tall in the Final EIR.  Even if modified by 20 ft. it would STILL be the Tallest building in ALL the Beach Cities in ~50 years. Only two condos in Redondo Beach built in the 1970s, that would never pass restrictions today are taller.

  • They are spending $16M in pre-development/PR public funds to push through the project. 

Voice your opposition to the project.

Send public comments to by 5:00 p.m.  on Wed. 

You can copy elected officials.

Or simply raise your hand to speak. You can ask questions or speak on any agenda item.



Strategic Planning Half-Day, Friday, Oct. 15, 1-5 p.m.
Attendees include Board members, Executive Team, Staff members, Committee members, consultants, and volunteers.


This meeting is billed by BCHD as one of it's methods "to get public input".  However, holding a 4-hour meeting during  work hours, paying staff to attend, and ensures this meeting is NOT representative of the public.

Here Below is an Alternatives are some “pre-work” table that shows how BCHD presents the project to its staff, public, and perhaps other city and agency officials. They plan to choose a project option to move forward with based on its criteria

A Few Takeaways (in the fine print)

  • The total cost of the HLC project is now $450M, that’s 17% higher than it’s previous price tag of $374M.

  • The six alternatives are rated, based on their own criteria, including “expected community alignment”

  • BCHD identifies only ONE significant impact stated in EIR - Height of RCFE, cited as "Long-term impacts that cannot be mitigated from the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This does not include temporary impacts of construction noise.”

  • In other words, 5+ years of significant, known harmful noise to surrounding neighborhoods is NOT even considered in BCHD’s project choice.


You can send public comments to by 11:00 a.m. on Friday, October 15, 2021. For verbal comments, simply raise your hand during the Zoom meeting.

See Reasons to Oppose

BCHD is launching a flurry of PR communications and Committee meetings, prior to their October Board Meeting. According CEO Tom Bakaly, the BCHD Board will select and approve a project at the Oct. 27 Board meeting. Public input may be gathered by BCHD-sponsored polls, surveys, interviews, etc. Ensure you and other local residents are aware and provide feedback about this misguided project.

Here's the rundown of meetings currently scheduled.

Wednesday, Oct. 27, 6:30 p.m. BCHD Board Meeting 
Important: Selecting and Approving a Project Design for the HLC may be on the agenda.

Take Action!
Write to your City Council and City Officials Today!

The BCHD Board of Directors certified a FEIR that did not adequately address the comments of the Responsible Agencies, or the public.

The City of Torrance issued a strong statement to the BCHD Sept. 8 Public Hearing confirming what the public has been saying - the responses that Wood, BCHD's consultant provided to the EIR were deficient and inadequate in almost every major CEQA category.

It's imperative that the City hears from you. Urge your City Electeds and Officials to take action and challenge the incomplete EIR, before the time limit is up. Click here for a sample letter and contact info:

In your e-mail, you can:

  • Let the know you want them to protect Torrance residents from the significant and avoidable impacts of the BCHD project 

  • Urge the City to take legal action against the EIR within the time limit.

  • Ask them to deny BCHD access to any and all Torrance property – Flagler Lane and Flagler Alley and any associated land. 

Read the 9/15 Easy Reader article on the project and opposition - comment online.

BCHD Board of Directors Meeting
Wed, Sept.22 at 6:30 p.m.

Zoom Meeting:
Password: beach
Phone Conference:
Dial In: (253) 215-8782
Webinar ID: 840 9197 2179

See Agenda 

Send to or click Here:
Fill out by 5:00pm on Wed., Sept.22

Raise your hand during the Zoom Meeting.


BCHD Board Self-Certifies Final EIR 

As expected, the BCHD Board certified its Final EIR at the Sept. 8 Virtual Public Hearing. In a rare case, BCHD wore both hats in the EIR process: project applicant/proponent and Lead Agency/EIR approver.


Importantly, the City of Torrance weighed in citing a multitude of CEQA categories and deficiencies that were not adequately addressed in the FEIR.  Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager for the City of Torrance presented official FEIR comments on behalf of the city.

Read the City of Torrance's Comments here.


He cited, in part, “responses provided did not adequately respond to the City of Torrance’s comments related to significant and avoidable impacts to Torrance areas with respect to Aesthetics, Visual Resources, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Noise and Vibration, Transportation and Traffic, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas emissions, by incorporating modifications that would allow for the stated program objectives to still be achieved.”  

Note that:


  • As a Responsible Agency, the City of Torrance has extensive expertise in the CEQA process.

  • Torrance, along with the City of Redondo Beach, will be asked to approve discretionary permits.

  • Torrance included an addendum of residents’ letters received during the  BCHD EIR timeframe. 


Despite repeated and vocal opposition to the project, despite not addressing cited deficiencies to the FEIR, and despite allowing only two business to review the 1,778-page FEIR document, BCHD self-certified the Final EIR.

Thanks to everyone who got on the record through sending and voicing their comments.

Next Steps

BCHD will next decide on the project or project alternative to approve in the next month or so. Then the project the moves onto the City of Redondo Beach for design review and CUP, and the City of Torrance for permits.

Stay tuned.

Read the Easy Reader article 

by Kevin Cody

[UPDATE: Wednesday, September 8, 9 p.m.]

Excerpted below - note article has 2019

rendering shown.

"The Beach Cities Health District Board of Directors unanimously voted to certify the Healthy Living Campus Environmental Impact Report at its Wednesday night meeting.

The vote followed nearly three hours of public comment, all of it in opposition to the proposed  11-acre, $374 million, 254,700 square foot project.

Prior to Wednesday night’s action, over 300 people submitted comments about the nearly 2,000-page EIR. Almost all were in opposition to the project, including a 70-page petition with approximately 1,200 residents’ signatures."

Final EIR now posted
BCHD has posted the FEIR and meeting details for the Sept. 8 Virtual Meeting to Approve the EIR. Spoiler Alert: BCHD has NOT addressed even the most basic requests from the Responsible Agencies: the Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance.
See links below:

  • Final Environmental Impact Report

  • BCHD's Responses to the City of Redondo Beach, Torrance, and public's comments (non-responsive to many cited deficiences and requests for additional information)


BCHD's Public Hearing to Self-Certify the EIR is now VIRTUAL ONLY   Wed., Sept. 8 at 6:00 p.m.

Send comments, speak at the virtual meeting


Phone Conference:Dial In: (720) 707-2699

Webinar ID: 886 9494 4132

Send Written Comments to be read or speak at meeting



Send to and, send to your City officials


Use form:
Send by 5:00 pm on Wed. Sept. 8,.


Raise your hand during the Zoom Meeting 

Not sure what to say?

BCHD has NOT adequately addressed  deficiencies, omissions cited or requests from the Responsible Agencies: Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance, or the public.

Here's just a few of the deficiencies and issues cited by the Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance,  and residents, but NOT addressed, deflected or denied:

BCHD has failed to address the responsibie agencies' request to:

  1. Reduce height of RCFE structure

  2. Provide setbacks to RCFE structure

  3. Mitigate noise, which is over CEQA thresholds for on-site and surrounding residents and is cited as a "significant and unavoidable impact" to on-site and surrounding residents on all sides of the property during both Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction

  4. Address scale and mass of RCFE structure that is incompatible with city municipal codes, surrounding homes

  5. Provide visual aids/graphics, and photosimulations for Phase 1 and Phase 2 to make reasonable determinations.

  6. Further detail or provide visualizations of Phase 2 structures or plan.

See other Reasons to Oppose here.


BCHD's Public Hearing to Self-Certify the EIR is now VIRTUAL ONLY   Wed., Sept. 8 at 6:00 p.m.
Link and agenda still to come.

8/27/21 Update

BCHD's responses to the DEIR Comments are now posted online


Final EIR will be released prior to the Public Hearing to certify the EIR on Sept. 8.

BCHD's Responses to DEIR Comments are now posted here. See how they responded to the Responsible Agencies: the City of Redondo Beach and the City of Torrance, public agencies and the 300+ comment letters. 

Spoiler alert: BCHD has largely deflected answering technical deficiencies and omissions cited and provided "non- responsive" responses to the Responsible Agencies: the City of Redondo Beach and City of Torrance, and the public.​

Some excerpts of non-responsive responses from BCHD.


Request from City of Redondo Beach, Mayor Bill Brand for additional visual aids and exhibits.


BCHD’s response:


"The comment requests that the Draft EIR provide additional visual aids/exhibits of the proposed Project and alternatives to demonstrate compliance with referenced city goals, objectives, and policies. ...CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 states that “[a]n evaluation of environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive...”... Instead, an analysis of aesthetic and visual resources ... need only identify those that are the most representative and would provide “...a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental considerations” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15151). "

Request from City of Torrance Mayor Pat Furey to reduce height.

BCHD’s response:


“… the height of the RCFE Building was also raised from 4 stories to 7 stories to further minimize the total building footprint. However, the bulk and mass of the RCFE Building was focused behind the Redondo Village Shopping Center, which provides a setback of 250 feet and also forms a step-down in building height to the single- and multi-family residential development along Beryl Street.”



Request from City of Torrance to set back structure away from edge of property.

BCHD’s response: 

“BCHD is unable to located (sic) the building footprint further to the west due to the constraints associated with the existing BCHD campus. The building footprint must accommodate the continued operation of the Beach Cities Health Center as well as the Providence Little Company of Mary Medical Institute Building. The site plan must also accommodate internal circulation roads and pathways between these buildings. ."

BCHD's Public Hearing to Self-Certify the EIR  -  Wed., Sept. 8 at 6:00 p.m.

 Upcoming Public Hearing to Certify the EIR 
Wednesday, September 8, 2021 at 6:00 p.m.


NEW! Meeting will be VIRTUAL ONLY (Link to be provided)


Meeting currently planned to be virtual. According to the schedule, BCHD is supposed to release the Final EIR 10 days ahead of certification, but it is not yet released.

Mark your calendars, ensure everyone's comments are heard.

8/1/21 Update
Torrance Traffic Commission Meeting-
Mon. 8/2 at 7:00 p.m.

West Annex - Commission Meeting Room


Torrance City Hall

3031 Torrance Boulevard

Torrance Traffic Commission will discuss and take public input on the trial southbound closure of Flagler Lane south of Beryl Street that took place from May 19 to June 8, 2021. Staff will present traffic data gathered before and during the trial closure period.


Agenda and staff report (item 7b) here.


Attend in person or you can email your comments to: PWTraffic@TorranceCA.Gov

DEIR Public Comments Released

Nearly 3,000 pages of DEIR public comments were submitted in response to the BCHD HLC Draft Environmental Impact Report. A preliminary review showed:

  • 98% of commenters found the DEIR to be deficient, were opposed to the project, or concerned with the project.

See link to comments here:


Did you submit comments?

Confirm your comments to the DEIR are included. If missing, contact and send us an email at to ensure appropriate follow-up on your comments.


Final EIR and Response to Comments – should be released to the public 10 days prior to the public hearing.


IMPORTANT: Per CEQA, BCHD as the lead agency MUST ADDRESS deficiencies in the DEIR pointed out by commenting agencies and the public.


Potential BCHD Board Certifiation Timing

Tentative dates for a Public EIR "Certification" Hearing for the FEIR review was announced as:

  • Sept. 8 – at a just-added Board Meeting at the Redondo Beach Performing Arts Theater. This would be in-person and live-streamed

  • Sept. 22 – at the regularly scheduled September BCHD Board Meeting

Virtual July Board of Directors Meeting 
Wed., July 28, 2021 at 6:30 p.m.


Virtual Video Conference:
Password: beach
Phone Conference:
Dial In: (669) 900-9128
Webinar ID: 822 1324 8273


Send to or use form:


Please raise your hand during the Zoom Meeting.

From the CEO Report:
"Formal EIR comments received will be posted on the website. Responses to public EIR comments received within the comment period will be made public as part of the final EIR before it is considered for certification by the Board. We are anticipating that the Board will consider EIR certification on either September 8th or at the Board meeting on September 22nd."
  • Spending $133K in PR/Marketing contracts over next few months to promote the HLC 
  • Continually dismisses/deflects public opposition with misleading statements by CEO
  • Continual delays and non-response to a large numbers of PRRs 



BCHD's Media Blitz


BCHD continues its aggressive marketing strategy to "spin" issues to try to dismiss and deflect any opposition. Its six-figure public relations campaign to "sell" its massive project in the next 3 months is on.


Here’s just one example:


BCHD states:

“Recently, a very small number of residents have attempted to deny our seniors the benefits of the Healthy Living Campus” - CEO Tom Bakaly’s response to opposition and a July 13 article in the Easy Reader.



1,200 voting residents signed a petition opposing the project in just a few weeks, prior to the pandemic.



Nearly 3,000 pages of public comments were submitted, along with objections and questions from the two responsible agencies - the Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance, TUSD, and organizations like the Sierra Club. Many comments point out how and why the BCHD’s DEIR was inadequate, deceptive, and flawed.


BCHD's own feasibility studies tell us that the HLC will NOT serve the local community.  With projections upwards of $12,000+ monthly rate per room, 80% of residents would come from outside of the beach cities, and many from out of Los Angeles County and out of state.


Does a public agency spending over six figures of taxpayer dollars for near-term marketing to "sell" a nine-figure project make sense to you?  We are committed to bringing you facts, not "spin".  Decide for yourself:  Is BCHD, by rushing and pushing the HLC, acting fairly and in the best interests of you, your family, your community, and your city?

Add your comments online.

Sand Box: Beach Cities Health District’s ‘Wealthy’ Living Campus on shaky foundation


by Bob Pinzler

When you purchase a home, one of the first things you should ask is if you can see the deed to prove that the seller actually owns it.

I asked the same question of the Beach Cities Health District, to determine if they have the legal right to build something other than a hospital on the property they occupy on Prospect in Redondo Beach. They did not have such a document.

The genesis of this question was the proposal by BCHD to build an ultra-high-income, assisted living community to replace their former South Bay Hospital building. My first question to them was what had been promised to the citizens of the three beach cities when they voted to establish the district.

The answer stunned me. They did not have a copy of the language of the measure that established them. More strangely, neither did the county which had run the election. Without this, I asked for a copy of their deed of ownership. After a few weeks, they sent me a copy of what they said was their deed. However, it contained only four of the five pages of what was an eminent domain action with the then owner, The Redondo Improvement Company (RIC).

The missing page was the key to the document and BCHD refused to find it. So, I did. 

On November 27, 1957, the LA Superior Court in Inglewood issued a “Final Judgement of Condemnation” which stipulated that for the payment of $125,000, RIC would deliver the property “to the use of the Plaintiff, the South Bay Hospital District…for the construction, completion and operation of a hospital thereon in order to provide hospital services for the residents of said district.”

Despite public records requests, BCHD has shown no further correspondence with RIC, its successor companies, nor the estate of Henry Huntington, the railway and land mogul whose company RIC was.  Therefore, what is in that deed stands as the sole property right of the BCHD.

The taking of private land by eminent domain is a controversial subject. However, it is a legal taking of private land for a specific public use. In this case, the public use was the building and running of a hospital. The fact that the District’s incompetence has made such an operation unviable does not free them from the demands of the eminent domain decree. The only thing that can be built on that property is a hospital and the Wealthy [Healthy] Living Campus they are proposing is not that.

When the BCHD renamed itself from the hospital district in 1993, it did not release itself from its land ownership requirement. Therefore, it seems clear that BCHD cannot legally build its new campus as proposed. If it comes to it, the City of Redondo Beach should reject any offerings to the contrary. If they don’t, they may be violating the law as well.

BCHD will have to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to extricate itself from the financial mess it has fumbled its way into. ERtself from the financial mess it has fumbled its way into. ER

See the deed here:
Approved at the June 23 Board Meeting

$8.5M additional funds for HLC PRE-development for a whopping total of over $16M. 

Not mentioned at the Board meeting, potential Homeless Shelter Pallet housing at the BCHD site that is on the Redondo Beach City Council meeting agenda, July 6 for discussion. BCHD is again blindsiding residents and its own tenants.

BCHD Board of Directors Virtual Meeting
Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 6:30 p.m.



According to the CEO Report:

"All public EIR comments and responses received within the comment period will be made public as part of the final EIR before it is considered for certification by the Board. We are anticipating that the Board will consider EIR certification in August."


On the agenda, the 2021/22 Budget that includes a whopping $8.5M additional funds for HLC Pre-development, bringing it to over $16M!


The Finance Committee did NOT have a quorum, yet they are moving the proposed budget ahead for approval at the Board meeting.



Virtual Video Conference:

Password: beach

Phone Conference:

Dial In: (669) 900-9128

Webinar ID: 931 7269 4646



Click Here:

Send by 5:00pm on Wednesday, June 23, 2021.


BCHD is more than DOUBLING its budget for the HLC to over $16M in predevelopment funding!

Being proposed at the Finance Committee Meeting on June 17 at 6:00 p.m.

BCHD is proposing to MORE THAN

And this is before the agency and public comments are even assessed and addressed, before the Final EIR is out and before it goes before the Board for approval.

If you wonder how they can justify over $16M in pre-project costs, ask or send a comment at tonight's meeting.



June 17, 2021

6:00 PM

Video Conference:

Password: beach

Phone Conference:

Dial In: (669) 900-9128

Webinar ID: 969 4434 3999


Click Here:

Please fill out the form on the link above by 5:00pm on Thursday, June 17, 2021.

BCHD is proposing to MORE THAN DOUBLE its budget for the HLC at its Finance Committee Meeting TONIGHT at 6:00 p.m.

And this is before the agency and public comments are even assessed and addressed, before the Final EIR is out and before it goes before the Board for approval.

If you wonder how they can justify over $16M in pre-project costs, ask or send a comment at tonight's meeting.


Click Here:

Please fill out the form on the link above by 5:00pm on Thursday, June 17, 2021.


Thanks to everyone who sent in comments!

Important upcoming milestones - 

  1. Final EIR to be released - technical deficiences must be addressed.

  2. According to BCHD, expected date for Board to review and certify final EIR likely in August

  3. Conditional use permit for RCFE on public zoned land to the Redondo Beach Planning Commision.


Plan on attending and commenting at important decision-making meetings. Inform others. 



Click on images to learn more:

Screen Shot 2021-10-12 at 9.24.01 PM.png
Screen Shot 2021-10-30 at 10.06.39 AM.png
Screen Shot 2021-11-09 at 11.02.38 PM.png
Screen Shot 2021-06-04 at 3.09.26 PM.png
TRAFFIC final ad.png



























Over 100 mature trees to be removed...just for Phase 1.

Happy Earth Day! Brought to you by the BCHD.

[Ref. DEIR Sec. 3.3 Biological Resources]

20 trees along Flagler Lane, north of Towers Street. (*must have permit approval from Public Works, City of Torrance)

60 trees along the northern perimeter of the campus to clear for the city block long RCFE

20 trees along Diamond Street for the SCE Substation Yard.



From the DEIR:

“The Tree Inventory Report prepared by Carlberg Associates (2019) concluded that 219 of the 228 of the landscaped trees located on the Project site are in good condition. ...redevelopment of the Project site would require the direct removal of approximately half of the existing landscaped trees as well as a number of shrubs and other non-native ground cover. Additionally, adjacent vegetation, not proposed for removal, could be indirectly impacted by intrusion into their root zone.”

The more you know, the more there is to oppose...


A Cautionary Tale - Now Playing Out


Did you see the mess from the broken water main on Prospect and Del Amo Blvd and the chaos that’s still ensuing? Drivers rerouted and cutting through the neighborhood. Intersections out of commission. The nearby Henrietta water basin nature preserve was flooded with silt and the wildlife is nowhere to be seen.


These photos show what can happen when plans go awry.


Imagine what’s to come if the BCHD project is approved. The project will bring 5 plus years of construction, hazards, and unmitigated noise, impacting our daily lives and permanently damaging our quality of life. Mitigations can’t stop unforeseen accidents. 


Think the public services of the cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance won’t be affected? 



Say NO to overdevelopment. Stop the development of the (un)Healthy Living Campus. Demand your elected officials hold BCHD accountable.


Important: Send comments to the before times up on June 10, 2021. Send as many and as often as you like.





Go to ARCHIVE news










Screen Shot 2021-05-15 at 12.59.28
bottom of page