Mark's Report on Open Forum, Part 2

So now that I have had about 5 hours worth of sleep, I will continue with comments and my personal opinions concerning the forum.

Imagine a room filling with people as the meeting time approached. Can you see that about two-thirds of the people that would eventually overfill the ballroom were wearing yellow and black "Ponte Vista Supporter" buttons. Again, I was impressed. Not only had the supporter items changed from rectangular signs to yellow buttons, the buttons were quite a bit bigger than my little black R-1 buttons. And only one of them was worn by a speaker.

Comments were heard (and made by me) concerning the vast ratio of "supporters" to folks who wore no buttons at the forum. It should be noted, for the record, that Mr. Bisno not only paid for feeding the committee as he always has done, the forum was the meeting where Mr. Bisno also paid for dinner for authorized supporters.

Both the meeting and the forum in which Mr. Bisno provided dinner to his supporters saw the largest ratio of supporters to others turn out. This seems to play out that the idea is to get the largest group together, feed them.

Everyone else, except some folks who wore supporter buttons and crashed the dinner buffet of the committee got to enjoy snacks and liquids provided by Mr. Bisno. The supporters used these tables for deserts, it appears.

I was genuinely impressed by the number of folks who turned out in support of Mr. Bisno's plans. I was more impressed by many of them who actually gave opinions that seemed to be their own. I am not suggesting that there weren't a number of supporters who didn't "tow the line" in repeating words like "affordable", "Quality" and "all traffic issues have been mitigated", but there were some unique comments from supporters, whether Mr. Bisno liked that or not.

The representatives of various groups supporting Mr. Bisno showed up and gave good comments to the committee why their group supported the project.

The union members representing skilled trades that will build whatever goes into Ponte Vista stuck around for the entire meeting and were courteous listeners to all speakers. Being a union member myself make be a bit more biased on this issue, but I applaud their attendance, and their contribution to the forum.

All the Chambers of Commerce who supported the project were represented at the forum, too. Their speaker gave their reasoning. I was amused that the Torrance C.of C. speaker talked about all the monies that would pour into area businesses, yet failed to include San Pedro, by name, in the communities that would see benefit to businesses.

There was no representative of the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce that spoke at the forum. This is understandable when the committee learned from Mr. Jack Baric, a committee member and someone associated with the San Pedro C. of C., that the group was not yet in a position to comment on the project. The committee knew this so not having our own Chamber of Commerce endorse the project at the forum was not an issue and shouldn't be an issue by anyone.

There were a good number of quotable quotes, in my opinion. There were both supporters and opponents who didn't really have much of a clue what actually is being proposed at Ponte Vista.
One supporter asked what the buildings would look like, even though there were illustrations posted at one end of the room.
Several supporters wondered where the office for Ponte Vista is. We couldn't tell them during the forum that the Ponte Vista office is......at Ponte Vista. I am sure one of thier representatives informed these folks where to go for information.
One supporter said he didn't want "500" homes at Ponte Vista, but he thought the "2,200" was a fine number.
One supporter liked the project, but said he would like to see 1,700 homes on the site. Here was a guy that didn't "tow the line", I hope he is not reprimanded by the organization.

Opponents of the project also weren't shy about being misinformed about the project. They spoke with any coaching from any organization, it seems, so their misinformation is understood, for the most part, by me.

"Affordable" was the word most often used by the largest percentage of supporters who spoke at the forum. I will always wonder how these fine folks know that any home at Ponte Vista would actually be affordable and how these homes might be so much less expensive than other homes in the area.

When Mr. Bisno and I had our sidebar where he gave me his personal opinion on the POSSIBLE breakdown of bedrooms per unit, I don't remember anybody standing behind us listening to our quiet conversation. I wonder how these supporters know something that hasn't been given to the committee, the press, other supporters, opponents, or the rest of the public for that matter.

Mr. Bisno's lofts, (that's no bedrooms, unlike some of the lofts being constructed around town) are estimated to begin pricing in the low to mid-low $300,000 at this time. Mr. Bisno told me that there will be approximately 60% of the homes as three-bedroom units, no matter if they are in the senior section or not, and 10% of the units will have four bedrooms each. Mr. Bisno told me that the big, four bedrooms homes might have an asking price in the area of $1.2 Million Dollars.

None of the prices for any unit anywhere at Ponte Vista will include the monthly HOA fees that may be in the $350.00 to $5oo.oo per month range.

Some opponents who spoke claimed the homes were being sold at "market price" or "market rate" and will be in line with prices of homes in the surrounding San Pedro area.

Lack of needed housing in the area was also claimed by supporters as something the project would help alleviate, if built with 2,300 homes. Claims were made that R1 would not bring enough homes into an area that needed many more homes for the influx in population and jobs into the area.

Opponents claimed the project contained too many homes and some didn't believe that there would be enough jobs with a salary required to buy any homes at Ponte Vista.

"Quality" was also a word much used by both supporters and opponents. Supporters claimed the homes would be built with a high degree of quality construction and amenities and the quality of life in a gated community would be very high.

Opponents suggested that quality of life of folks who didn't buy at Ponte Vista would suffer greatly by such a large development and some claimed that R1 homes (up to 429) would certainly have a high degree of quality in them.

Supporters also equated quality with safety. Two single mothers spoke that they felt buying an "affordable" home at Ponte Vista would guarantee a good quality of live, added security, and a better chance for their children. It must be mentioned here that these two moms were I.L.W.U. card holders with 10 and 8 years respectfully as card-carrying longshorewomen.

It is very true that card-carrying I.L.W.U. members can very easily have the income necessary to buy just about anything they want, wherever they want. There are already some gated condominium and patio-home developments in the area of San Pedro and R.P.V.

"Senior Housing", fell just behind affordable as the reasoning for supporting Ponte Vista. There were, perhaps, a majority of supporters that were of the age to buy a home in the senior section of Ponte Vista. Many speakers talked about the benefits of living in a senior complex of homes.

There wasn't a general opposition to the idea of senior housing. As a matter of fact, I have called for the enlargement of the ratio of senior housing to non-age restricted homes at Ponte Vista.

The largest opposition to the idea of senior housing came from both supporters and opponents. Having more seniors driving on Western Avenue and the fact that senior housing at Ponte Vista would require our oldsters to drive on Western to just about everywhere except Green Hills brought some of the biggest laughs and cringes of the evening.

"Mitigation" Supporters who spoke about traffic mitigation claim that all the mitigation in the DEIR is finished and everything proposed was correct, now "let's move on." These supporters feel Mr. Bisno will pay for all the proposed mitigation and that only the mitigation proposed in the DEIR needs to be done to completely deal with any problems on Western Avenue.
Mitigation appears to be a done deal with supporters and they are very pleased that Mr. Bisno has completely taken care of all potential problems with possible traffic issues.

Opponents, on the other hand had a very different take on traffic mitigation.
One opponent used the DEIR itself to claim that traffic at 52 of the 52 intersections studied would be worse if the proposed project is built.
At least one opponent reminded all of us about the sinkholes and one of the opponents brought up the possible future sinkholes of the storm drains that haven't been looked at yet.
Many opponents questioned the facts and figures presented in the DEIR and how they were markedly different than numbers used with other projects

Supporters claimed that mitigation is fine as it is and the committee should move on with other areas. Committee members, such as myself, have read many different parts of the DEIR and I can assure everyone that we don't just deal with traffic.

Everyone, including Ms. Hahn, acknowledge that traffic is the number one issue concerning anything that would go into Ponte Vista. Ms. Hahn and others thought that further mitigation should be looked at.

Opponents wanted you to know that the primary means of traffic mitigation proposed by Mr. Bisno, that being the synchronization of the signals between 25th Street and Palos Verdes Drive North, and beyond on Western Avenue was going to be done by the city and CALTRANS. What supporters didn't mention, but opponents repeated several times was that all the ATSAC was going forward and the funding was in place, no matter whether Mr. Bisno paid for it or not.
So the primary benefit Mr. Bisno proposed is already moving forward, with him or without him.

Opponents wanted a trust fund created for, and more study done on more traffic mitigation measures, over and above what Mr. Bisno proposed because they were already in the pipeline.
A few folks talked about using more of the Western Avenue Task Force recommendations in mitigating the Ponte Vista traffic issues.

On a very important note for me, both Ms Hahn and a supporter called for a new road linking Western Avenue to Gaffey Street, no matter what gets built at Ponte Vista. As you may know I have been calling for this for many months now and there is a fairly large post concerning my vision for that road, buried in the early posts of this blog. Please take a look at my pictures.
Thank you Ms. Hahn and Supporter for coming on board with this idea. You done good!

Overall, I feel that the forum brought to light several factors that should be looked into by the next public forum.

First, I hope more supporters become more informed as to the real facts of the project before they speak to committee members who have gone over the DEIR in some detail and have a much higher knowledge of Mr. Bisno's actual proposals than the vast majority of supporters seem to have.

Second, if opponents want to have a larger turnout for their side, I suggest the two Neighborhood Councils openly in opposition to Mr. Bisno's plans pay for feeding their folks. It was evident that providing dinner brings out more people. Well perhaps, a better phone tree, and organization workers to contact folks was the real reason so many supporters came out. It is easier for Mr. Bisno to pay staffers to make sure seats are filled than for volunteers on the other side to get folks to come to meetings.

That last paragraph being written as it is, it must be noted that during regular meetings of the committee, more opponents show up than supporters.

Third, everyone should get their facts straight and supporters should demand that Mr. Bisno publicly state what the price ranges might be when units are built. Everyone should also encourage Ms. Hahn to give her thoughts on how many homes at Ponte Vista she could consider. I would like to hear a range of numbers. Ms. Hahn has publicly opposed the concept of building 2,300 homes at Ponte Vista. Because she has claimed what she doesn't want, how about a range of numbers she could be comfortable with.

Forth, it is time to start the process of compromise. I have written and most knowledgeable folks have accepted two ideas. a) 2,300 homes will not be built at Ponte Vista, and b) the final development will not be zoned R1. It is my belief that it would be much harder to keep the site R1 than it would be for Mr. Bisno to build his 2,300 homes, but both proposals should now be set aside and real thought should be put into creating a real specific plan that addresses real issues that can be considered by decision.

I would hope by the next public forum our committee would be able to listen to speakers address a very different Ponte Vista than the one proposed by Mr. Bisno. Our committee is very willing to make recommendations when the comment period for the DEIR ends and we should be able to have some realistic facts and figures in proposals that folks can really sink their teeth into and let us know what they think.

Fifth, I wish Mr. Bisno would end his quest to control every aspect dealing with the CAC and start a real dialogue with members to find the best outcome possible.

Just before we left for the forum, we all received a package that presented "letters" from 82 supporters of Mr. Bisno's plans. On a first look, the "letters" were all written on blank paper, hand written in ink and most of them had a date of December 5 or December 6, 2006.
Perhaps that was Mr. Bisno's strategy session and dinner that we weren't invited to.

Many of the short "letters" claimed the writer approves of Mr. Bisno's plans and doesn't want R1 zoning at Ponte Vista. Great coaching Ponte Vista!

Mr. Bisno has sent members of the committee pamphlets for prior meetings where he wants to present presentations in favor of his project. Our committee is supposed to be "unbiased" as a supporter claims. Why won't Mr. Bisno let us do our duties without a presentation at each meeting? Please let us take the comments, both oral and written from the forum and give us time to digest them without any intrusion by Mr. Bisno and his staff.

Sixth, during the forum, Mr. Greenwood stopped the meeting to admonish folks not to heckle speakers they did not agree with. It was sure fun to laugh during the funny bits, but unfortunately Mr. Greenwood had to take to task opponents of Mr. Bisno's plans who heckled a supporter. The vast majority of the crowd were supporters and they were at least courteous enough to keep their heckling at a very low level. I am quite pleased to report that the loudest things heard at the forum was laughter and not shouting. Everyone should be very proud of all of us for behaving like adults.

Seventh, thank you for your comments both oral and written. Committee members want you to know that we are as unbiased as we can be and we are doing what we are doing to support the best interests of all of us who live and work in the area. I would appreciate any Emails concerning any issue, including this blog. My Email address is always at the top of the blog.

I want everyone to have the best and most factual information possible. Although I disagree with Mr. Bisno's current plans, I also need to let everyone know that my very strong support of R1 and keeping Ponte Vista's current zoning by no way means I am not willing and able to consider alternatives that would have the final development at a higher density than R1 (up to nine homes per acre) I know this paragraph offends both sides of the issue, but as I was quoted in the Daily Breeze on Thursday, "we're all in this together." Let's compromise.