Election, but no candidates

Dear ER:

The Beach Cities Health District could and should have saved taxpayers $383,506.79 by canceling this fall’s board election. No election was required because only three candidates are running for the three seats. Lack of interest in the District’s election has canceled the election before. But that’s not what’s happening this time. Instead, BCHD is moving ahead spending nearly $400,000 on a $30M bond measure vote this fall. Sadly, the $400,000 on the bond measure election doesn’t include all the taxpayer funding that BCHD spent on lawyers, consultants, surveys, manipulation of measure wording, and other money BCHD spent on preparing the bond. Let’s just call it $1 million total as a round number. That’s a lot of taxpayer money to spend, when the surveys show that about half of the taxpayers object to the $30 million bond.

BCHD is hell bent on tearing down the hospital building, even though its own $100,000 consultant report stated that “best practice” allows 25 years continued use as-is before demolition. Why is BCHD tearing it down? It’s simple. BCHD wants to use taxpayer money so its  commercial real estate developer can save $21 million by not having to tear it down, put in sod, and add parking. BCHD wants to stick the taxpayers with that bill.

Here’s a better idea. BCHD spends $2.4 million every year on its 13 executives who manage a total of 137 full and part-time employees. How about we skinny down that fat executive payroll to pay off the $30 million. Taxpayers deserve to reap the benefit of BCHD taking at least $1 million in chief blah-blah-blah officers off the books, and canceling this fall’s election.

Mark Nelson

Redondo Beach

Back on the schools

Dear ER:

Beach Cities Health District is asking taxpayers to approve a $30 million property tax bond.  They cite a heightened need to provide mental health services to our youth and that Redondo students are the number one consumer of the services. Should we take a step back and think why Redondo students might be the number one consumer of mental health services? Perhaps it is the fact that former School Superintendent Dr. Steven Keller and friends kept our students out of school the longest during COVID and our students have endured severe emotional distress from it? If RBUSD students are the main consumer of the allcove mental health services then BCHD should be asking RBUSD for the bulk of funding. However, BCHD cannot do that because RBUSD is asking residents for a $278 million property tax bond. Fun fact: did you know that 97% percent of the Beach Cities residents are insured and have access to mental health services even without allcove? I am not sure what problem BCHD is trying to solve.

BCHD cites wellness as their goal, but ignores the fact there are over 2,000 homes in its immediate vicinity and four schools that will endure years of construction pollution. This project will aggravate childhood asthma and students with chronic allergies will be impacted. BCHD has changed the purpose of their existence without asking taxpayers. Just say no to the Beach Cities Health District bond of $30 million in November!

Candace Allen Nafissi

Redondo Beach

Costly election

Dear ER:

The Beach Cities Health District could and should have saved taxpayers $383,506.79 by canceling this fall’s board election. No election was required because only three candidates are running for the three seats. Lack of interest in the District’s election has canceled the election before. But that’s not what’s happening this time. Instead, BCHD is moving ahead spending nearly $400,000 on a $30M bond measure vote this fall. Sadly, the $400,000 on the bond measure election doesn’t include all the taxpayer funding that BCHD spent on lawyers, consultants, surveys, manipulation of measure wording, and other money BCHD spent on preparing the bond. Let’s just call it $1 million total as a round number. That’s a lot of taxpayer money to spend, when the surveys show that about half of the taxpayers object to the $30 million bond.

BCHD is hell bent on tearing down the hospital building, even though its own $100,000 consultant report stated that “best practice” allows 25 years continued use as-is before demolition. Why is BCHD tearing it down? It’s simple. BCHD wants to use taxpayer money so its  commercial real estate developer can save $21 million by not having to tear it down, put in sod, and addparking. BCHD wants to stick the taxpayers with that bill.

Here’s a better idea. BCHD spends $2.4 million every year on its 13 executives who manage a total of 137 full and part-time employees. How about we skinny down that fat executive payroll to pay off the $30 million. Taxpayers deserve to reap the benefit of BCHD taking at least $1 million in chief blah-blah-blah officers off the books, and canceling this fall’s election.

Mark Nelson

Redondo Beach