How is January 2009 an election year...maybe if you said Oct. 09, which would be the start of 2010 elections, but January 2009 is dead then.

Was it sarcasm?

... and our beaches are going to get a lot worse now...

http://spoutingoff.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/cri...

Looks like "Surfer" Dana didn't lift a finger to push this measly request through - again.
Maybe he was too busy arranging for more arms and cash for his "freedom fighter" buds in the Taliban?
Or it could be there just wasn't enough time between his meetings with war criminal buddy Ollie "Mr. America" North and convicted crook/longtime pal Jack Abramoff?
Perhaps he was he pre-occupied promoting his "dinosaur flatulence" global-warming theory to the neo-cons around Capitol Hill?

This guy's gotta be one of the all-time biggest do-nothings to walk the halls of Congress. Voters, please get out there this November and send this guy packing. I can't think of a single major accomplishment he's achieved on behalf of Long Beach residents in his 19 years in office.

John Galt,

It's not sarcasm, it's a stupid mistake. Thank you for your comment. The post has been corrected.

Ps. Dagny called...she wants her smokes back--the ones with the dollar signs on 'em.

Please everyone vote in November we need to ditch Dana stat. I mean, who actually thinks this guy still does anything....

Just a thought, but why does the city never talk about at least improving the overall look of the beach we have in LB. I'm all for taking down the breakwater or reconfiguring, but in the meantime i think it's interesting that we have one of the most unattractive stretches of coast that i can think of.

It wouldn't bring waves, but creating a more positive beach landscape would at least inspire more people to actually use the beach we have. I'm talking about the stretch between DT and the pier. It's like a giant wasteland.

Anybody else picking up what i'm putting down?

FYI, the city of Long Beach Marine Advisory Commission published a 28+ page document about this subject in 1998.
It was titled "Observations and Comments on Current City Beach Use" and proposed to create a "Mothers' Beach West" on the shore in front of the Villa Riviera. Wouldn't that have been interesting? Or not?

For years, this city has touted its "safe & non-threatening beach" to beach-goers with small children, omitting the section that is most vital: "unless your kids want to get in the water."

I have no idea who was on the this commission and/or who drafted this report, but the recommendations of this group are bizarre.

In the report, that section referenced in post #6 is called "The Empty Quarter"-- west of the Belmont Pier until the Villa Riviera.

Here is the full text of the report's executive summary:

"Of the 5 1/2 miles of beach front in Long Beach, it is noted that 4 miles of the ocean beach is [are] under utilized. Contrary to this observation is the Mother's Beach development in Alamitos Bay, which has proven to be very popular. The apparent reasons for this popularity include tranquil water for small children, ease of access and nearby parking, along with shaded grassy areas for picnicking which prove attractive to a wide range of ages. Another area experiencing popular use is in the downtown area where the water is tranquil in the protection of the near shore oil island. At this location, the width of beach sand from the waters edge to the back of the sand area is more than 400 feet, however, the utilized portion of the sand area is less than 100 feet. In comparing this pattern of the width of active beach usage, it is apparent that much of our beach, measuring up to 800 feed width, is unused. Several potential ideas to increase beach use are provided in concept. It is suggested that the City consider initiating efforts to pursue these or other ideas to enhance the utilization of these beach areas."

As far as I know, nothing has come of this report.

However, I think this commission is missing the point: People in Long Beach use mother's beach, not because of its tranquility and grass, but because they have no other choice but to swim in the mouth and at the ass of the most polluted river in America. Talk about oversight!

I completely agree with you that the city has failed to 'work with what they got.'
My theory is that city representatives foresee a slew of issues that would demand money and attention immediately after someone prettied-up the beach--parking, refuse, security, etc.... No one wants to touch the subject.

But if it's any consolation, I hear they're adding a separate pedestrian walking lane next to the bike path. Apparently, too many small children are crossing that 8-inch line that divides strolling humans and whizzing-by bikes. Couldn't have seen that one coming...

DeLong got to Dana to satisfy a few irrational big campaign donors on the peninsula. Those who built it and modified it from the 50's thru the 70's, never sought nor needed Fed consent or funds. They would claim an emergency, or primary jurisdiction, basically, and proceed without much notice.. Then, and along the way, the State and Fed's would be brought along. Quite common. Our engineers and legal staff, without a single outside consultant did it. We can easily do simple test modifications as well. Child's play for true Pro's. Gary is just stalling and this is but one more reason to consider if a better person should serve us ? Does the Shore want to be like Seal Beach, Surfside and sunset ? Or where kids leave saying'' I am tired of living where the sewers meet the sea'....and '' Later....Wrong Beach''. Compare the appraised value increase elsewhere, where swimming and surfing, and fishing, thrive.

Connoly Pacific made millions providing the rock from Catalina, they should donate dredge and crane work to lower some of it, below the mean low tide line, to function like a far offshore reef. The openings should be gradually widened too.

The Feds have limited funds to make a huge deal out of stopping us as well.

And for paranoid laymen in the shore, check the true site elevation in the shore and on the peninsula as compared to the 3 gorgeous communities to the South , we are high and safe compared to the little flood spot in Sunset Beach.

Not enthusiastically embracing this due to false fear is yet one more reason thousands think DeLong.....is Wrong....again and again...and again.

Sorry re the MSP"S

Can't we go through the couch cushions of city hall?

Dear Mr. Post #8, would you like to chat this up with me? I'd love to find out what you know about all this. Drop me a line: jenny@thedistrictweekly.com

Ok why don't they get it ! Dana's loyalty is with HB, he doesn't want HB to lose any money by creating the best surfing and biggest beach.

Long Beach will get rich when the breakwater comes down.

Yes, by all means vote for Debbie Cook and encourage everyone you know to do the same.

As for Message #8, I've sort of been suggesting the same thing in a way. Why can't we start saber rattling and threatening to sue the Feds for environmental destruction, etc? That way, after all the namecalling and threats, we all end up in a settlement whereby Long Beach is "willing" to take over jurisdiction of the Breakwater and adjust it if necessary? And yes, if that means that the engineers can create a great surf spot as well as more mundane "mother's beach" type areas with little surf, so be it.