LONG BEACH – City councilmembers voted 7-1 Wednesday night in favor of funding a $100,000 Army Corps of Engineers reconnaissance study, which will determine the value of the Long Beach breakwater to the federal government.
After nearly two hours of emotional community input and extensive debate among councilmembers, the city council approved using the tideland funds to cover the cost of the year-long study.
The reconnaissance study will establish whether or not it is in the federal government’s interest to maintain ownership of the breakwater or should hand ownership rights over to the California state government. In case of the latter, a feasibility study determining breakwater reconfiguration options, impacts and costs will transpire.
Approval to fund the study with city resources came two years after the Long Beach chapter of Surfrider Foundation put the topic on the city council agenda.
Joe Geever, the California policy coordinator for Surfrider’s national headquarters, came from San Clemente to speak in favor of funding the study.
“This is simply the first step in bringing sound science to the question,” Geever said. “This is a small down payment on a restoration project that would provide invaluable quality of life, environmental and economic benefits for all future generations.”
Traditionally, such projects are funded by the federal government’s budget. However, due to persistent concern from some community members and a general lack of understanding regarding the breakwater’s impact, the city opted to speed up the process by internally funding the study.
Councilmember Rae Gabelich outlined the future financial implications of breakwater research and reconfiguration.
“The reconnaissance study would cost about $50,000 and should take about a year,” Gabelich said. “The feasibility study, which is a cost-share of 50/50 percent – that could take three to four years. But in that 50 percent share that the city would have to partner with, 25 percent of that can be from the city [and] can consist of end-kind products or services.”
Gabelich also said that the feasibility study could cost $3 million to $5 million, making the city of Long Beach responsible for $750,000 to $1.25 million in the future, which she said was, in comparison to other projects, not a lot money.
Concerns, however, spewed from councilmembers regarding fund allocations.
Second District City Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal, referencing the study, said that problems for water quality issues should be investigated more thoroughly by the Long Beach Water Quality Task Force and other experts before expensive definitive solutions are sought.
“As stewards of the entire city, we’re responsible for the entire coast,” Lowenthal said. “I believe it’s important to know more about the sources of our water quality problems before making any assumptions about their solutions.”
Lowenthal and Third District City Councilman Gary DeLong proposed that the city council fund half of the study’s cost because outside donors, like the Port of Long Beach, have demonstrated interest in financially assisting the effort. Lowenthal also said tideland resources could be spent on other pertinent projects.
Councilmembers Patrick O’Donnell and Gabelich, however, nullified the argument, saying that partial funding would delay the study indefinitely and would further inundate future city council meetings with the issue.
“There’s discussion that has been postponed for two weeks to talk about creating the image of Long Beach as the ‘Aquatic Capital of America,'” said Gabelich. “How can we say this seriously, or with a straight face, if we haven’t done everything possible … to examine all of the possibilities to move our city into the very best that it can be. And that includes a healthy beach.”
