City officials say they’re ready to change the course of the dirty, dirty LA River

PHOTO by DANIEL DE BOOM

In a transformation that feels a little like something from the Old Testament—or maybe an episode of Mindfreak—Long Beach officials seem suddenly possessed by the idea that they can change the course of the Los Angeles River.

Public addresses two weeks apart by Mayor Bob Foster and Second District Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal have separately but unequivocally signaled legitimate interest in exploring a project that would bend the Los Angeles River westward at about Anaheim Street. The change would relocate the river’s dirty mouth, redirecting its polluted waters into the Port of Long Beach rather than the city’s recreational waterfront. A quick survey of a few other City Council members suggests broad, though preliminary, support for the idea.

It’s hard to say, exactly, what’s behind this unexpected mass conversion. Obviously, the rainy winter is providing repeated and appalling reminders that Long Beach is a bedpan for much of the Los Angeles Basin; each storm leaves the sand covered with garbage and the sea stirred into a broth of toxins. But that’s been the case forever—decades, at least—since the last leg of the Los Angeles River was twisted eastward toward the local beaches to accommodate the port’s expansion.

It’s most likely that a combination of factors is at work—the worst-in-California ranking that local beaches received from Heal the Bay, the City Council’s approval of a study to reconfigure the Long Beach Breakwater, increased awareness of the Port of Long Beach’s deadly environmental consequences and Long Beach’s need for a clean waterfront if it wants to attract the bathing-suit set.

Nonetheless, there’s no question that Foster gave the amazing idea political life when he addressed Long Beach’s ocean quality problems during his State of the City address on Jan. 15.

“This year we will look at a host of possible solutions,” the mayor told a Long Beach Convention Center crowd that included every member of the City Council and Harbor Commission. “One option may even include diverting the mouth of the LA River westward—back to its ancestral path into the port.”

Lowenthal, whose Second District adjoins the port, added her endorsement two weeks later during a speech to the Beer & Politics forum at Gallagher’s Pub on Jan. 30. The audience included Harbor Commission President Mario Cordero and City Council members Bonnie Lowenthal (whose First District also abuts the port) and Ninth District Councilman Val Lerch. Councilmembers Tonia Reyes Uranga and Gerrie Schipske have also indicated their qualified support.

“One of the solutions is to redirect the Los Angeles River back toward the port so we don’t get all that debris onto the beach,” said Lowenthal, speaking a few days after a recent rainstorm. She suggested the massive project could be completed within 10 years, and said interim measures ought to be taken as soon as possible. “If you had taken a walk on the beach two days ago, it would have broken your heart.”

The first person to publicly mention moving the Los Angeles River was downtown restaurateur John Morris. In October, in his own State of the City address to the Rotary Club on the Queen Mary, Morris cited the idea as one of many proposals put forth by a Downtown Visioning Group assembled by the Lowenthal councilwomen.

But the speed at which the idea is catching on now is illustrated by the reaction of Art Wong, the Port of Long Beach spokesman. Contacted the day after the mayor’s State of the City address, Wong said he’d never heard of it. Contacted again two weeks later, Wong said, “We can’t help but hear about it. We can’t avoid it.”

So far, port officials are keeping a low profile on the matter. It’s not likely they’re thrilled about paying the bill and absorbing the inconvenience of a biblically proportioned project.

“The flood control channel is owned by the Army Corps of Engineers and controlled by the County Flood Control District,” offered Wong when pressed for a reaction. “We’re all for clean water, but we can’t move the flood control channel. This idea strikes me like looking over the fence at my neighbor’s yard and saying, ‘Yeah, let’s go do something over there.’”

That doesn’t mean there isn’t something in the proposal for the port. Its continued expansion may be able to use a river-diversion project as repayment for environmental damage it does elsewhere—what’s known in planning circles as mitigation—or as the basis for land transport lines not yet devised.

But according to state Senator Alan Lowenthal, whose 27th District also includes the port, the most important aspect of this outrageously ambitious suggestion is the opportunity it provides the City Council to re-establish the proper relationship with the Harbor Commission.

“The Harbor Department is a department of the city,” said the senator. “The real leadership in terms of running the port is the City Council, whether the council always realizes it or not. The council has the right to ask these questions. The council has the right to set policy. The council selects the harbor commissioners—and now, with the change in the city charter, the council can remove harbor commissioners. I love that they can do that. I love it!”

Tags: city council, la river, Long Beach, lowenthal, Port of Long Beach, waste