UPDATE: Marina Rebuild Plan Falls Short, LB City Auditor Says

Updated to clarify the breakdown of project funding, correct the number of years the project is expected to take and add description of Jon Nahhas. 

For those keeping their boats in the Alamitos Bay and those living there, is a source of years-long contention. The $96 million proposal would rebuild the aging marina, but at a cost now being questioned.

Facts and figures seemed to conflict at Tuesday night’s Long Beach City Council meeting regarding the proposed Alamitos Bay Marina Rehabilitation Project, or Rebuild Project. City Auditor Laura Doud called the financial integrity of the nearly $100 million proposal into question, concluding that the current plan as set forth by Marina management is not supported by adequate funds. 

The Council approved a motion to review the City Auditor's recommendations and recommence six months from now.

The current Rebuild Plan would replace wooden docks with concrete ones over a period of five to six years, over half of which is to be paid for in the form of loans and bonds.

Doud told the Council that she was “unable to conclude that this marina rebuild plan is financially reliable.”

She proposed that instead of limiting the project to one bidder, which currently is Bellingham Marine, that Marine Management consider other, less expensive design options to find one that will best meet the city’s needs. Her recommendations were to conduct further financial analysis, determine the best slip occupancy of the marina, determine a fuller understanding of operating costs, assess debt services and consider additional design proposals. She called for a status report within six months.

George Chapjian of the Parks and Recreation Department called her audit “premature,” since the final financial statistics had not yet been decided.

Mark Sandoval, Marine Bureau Manager, is the head of the project. His rebuttal to Doud included the argument that the design bid for the Rebuild Project was a conceptual process that allowed flexibility and room for the project to be scaled back if need be.

Essentially, the project will be built and funded in phases. As of December 2010, funding for Phase One of the Marina Rebuild Plan had already been received, Sandoval said: $3 million from the Department of Boating and Waterways. This is the agency expected to contribute $40 million in the form of loans. The other areas of funding for the project overall are: $6 million from the marina fund, $50 million in revenue bonds, and any additional costs to be determined or added to marine fee revenues.

Sandoval’s stance that the Rebuild Plan allowed room for flexibility to scale back operations was complicated by Doud’s figures that showed the Rebuild Plan at $80 million in 2007, a number that has since increased.

Sandoval took the floor again to explain that there had been necessary costs since then, including a $1.7 million Environmental Impact Report to address health and safety issues, and additional mitigation work.

In response to the recommendation that more than one bidder be considered for the marina design project, Sandoval said that out of three major concrete developing agencies, one did not bid and the other has closed operations on the West Coast. This is a source of contention among boaters, including Jon Nahhas, an activist on harbor issues in the Los Angeles area, who said after the meeting that there were other bids, including one by the Cash Association, that were not being considered.

Nahhas also spoke at the meeting to say that this marina rebuild is disproportionately expensive, compared to other similar projects in public harbors. He made the claim that most reconstruction of docks in California cost between $20,000 and $40,000 per slip, while this project will cost each slip $60,000.

Sandoval clarified that number to the Council by saying that the non-marina slips here would cost $24,500, which means that doesn’t include the cost of things like restrooms, mitigation, EIR, permits and construction. He also questioned the area of study, stating that this Marina’s slip rates are lower than most in the area from Redondo Beach to Oceanside.

Though not directly stated at the meeting, the rebuild of the marina is thought by some to be an unfair targeting of small boats in favor of huge yachts.

Mike Lesner, who has lived on a 92-foot yacht in the Marina for the past 25 years, adamantly opposes the current plan.

He said before the meeting, “I’m expecting heads to roll. These problems have been festering for a while and tonight’s going to be a big night. There’s no way this rebuild project will be approved, and it took a lot of courage for city auditor Laura Doud to speak up and say, in hindsight rather than foresight, this is just not going to work.”

Lesner proposed at the meeting a shorter-term $15 million to $20 million project that will rehabilitate the marina with a wooden design that would be viable for the next 10 to 15 years. Then after that, the economy might be in better shape to take on a project of this size.

Sandoval later remarked that this plan is the highest quality plan and was approved almost unanimously at a Coastal Commission meeting, with three against out of around 150. He said the reality of putting the project back on the market is null, wood is not an option and this plan is more economical in the long run. As of now, the project is waiting for permits to be approved by the Coastal Commission and the Army Core of Engineers. He could not say exactly what the slip fee increases would be, or how much the marina would actually have to borrow later on down the line, but he said, "Personally, I think we can get through."

Doud, on the other hand, said later that she thinks "a better plan would be to determine what you can afford and then move forward, rather than doing it backwards."

Three stood up at the meeting to challenge or question the current plan, and two stood up to commend it. Speaking in support was Bud Lorbeer, commodore of the Long Beach Yacht club, who said he has had a boat docked in the marina since it was built. He said that he thought Sandoval’s plans were fabulous,  would be the envy of other marinas, and will be the “marina we need.” He declined comment afterward. 

Lesner also told the Council, “I’m aware that the bond market is soft, and I urge you all not to make the calamitous mistake of going through with this plan.”

Vice Mayor Suja Lowenthal asked whether, in case the bonds or other methods of funding fell through, the general city fund or Tidelands Fund would be dipped into. Chapjian assured the Council that bonds would only be backed by the Marina fund, not the general or Tidelands Fund.

Third District Councilman Gary DeLong, who represents Naples and Belmont Shore, said before the meeting, “I plan to keep moving this plan forward while maintaining financial viability. We’ve had a few calls from people who want to keep to the schedule as much as possible.”

After hearing both sides of the story, DeLong said, “We still have a long ways to go, but with 10 years behind us on this issue, I’ve gathered a sense of urgency from my constituents. We shouldn’t build more than we can afford, but we need to get moving as soon as possible.”