Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Pondering the Latest Meeting About Knoll Hill

Eastview Little League is a managed business in the San Pedro area that utilized its membership to get out a large group of supporters who want Eastview Little League to remain at Knoll Hill after they agreement they signed with the Port of Los Angeles expires.

According to statistics supplied during the dealings with that large property along Western Avenue, there are about 600 families that are part of Eastview Little League.

If I can guesstimate that the average number of family members is 5.5 persons, then it can be considered that Eastview Little League represents about 3,300 persons.

Just so I don't forget other numbers, a knowledgeable person at the meeting stated that there are about 30,000 residents of San Pedro living east of Pacific Avenue.

Now to cloud the issue even more, when the new park along 22nd Street is finished, there will be just about four large open areas east of Pacific Avenue where residents of all areas can enjoy, if possible.

Along with Knoll Hill, the new park along 22nd, I think we can count on the one baseball diamond at Block field and the park lands at Cabrillo Beach as being the only park lands/large open spaces east of Pacific Avenue.

Real San Pedrans certainly know about all the parks, open spaces, and recreational areas west of Gaffey Street and there is quite a bit of space in relation to what is available for recreation east of Pacific Avenue.

Now to the meeting.

The Port of Los Angeles, along with a company hired to work on the future of Knoll Hill, the Knoll Hill Advisory Board, and representatives of the California State Lands Commission held a meeting to a packed house of interested individuals and families that took up two of the three largest ballrooms at the Crowne Plaza Hotel.

The representatives from the State Lands Commission traveled from Sacramento to explain the Tidelands Trust laws and requirements.

They also provided: www.slc.ca.gov as the Web site that provides information about what can and what cannot be done with Knoll Hill.

Representatives of the Port of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative presented the meeting with four alternative conceptual illustrations for what might be at the park in the future.

Alternative number 1 consisted keeping two of the three existing temporary ball fields atop Knoll Hill and having parking for lots of cars. This alternative included some of the features being considered for the open spaces and park-like amenities.

This Alternative and Alternative number 2 have one large ball field and one T-ball field remaining on the site. Alternative number 2 calls for fewer parking spaces and more amenities for visitors like trails from the bottom of the hill, tot-recreational space, view amenities, and other items.

Alternative number 3 has only one large baseball field on the site and much more different suggestions for amenities than the first two Alternatives called for.

Alternative number 4 illustrated no ball field and a much larger portion of the site being open space with basically nothing but grass on much of the site.

The meeting participants also were given a two-sided sheet of questions with a large portion being set aside for folks to circle whatever amenities they thought should be considered.

Lots of folks had comments and questions. My question centered around the fact that I didn't see any illustrations of restrooms on any of the Alternatives so I asked if they would be provided.

It was explained to me that since the illustrations were only conceptual, they didn't show the placement of any restroom facilities. I thought that was a bit odd since the illustrations did show parking lots, ball fields, trails, trees and shrubs, and other amenities.

I highly doubt that the concept of restrooms is unreasonable or should have been left off all four posters.

Eastview Little Leagues wants the ball fields to remain for what can probably be determined to be for ever.

The Tidelands Trust and lawsuits currently prevent Eastview Little League from remaining on the site after their signed temporary agreement with the Port of L.A. Expires.

We know that Councilwoman Janice Hahn has stated that she would like to see the ball fields remain.

What we don't know is if Eastview would be willing to give up one of the two large fields it currently uses so that other folks have better access and uses of the top of Knoll Hill.

One very important bit of information was passed out during the meeting.

There is no legal issue from the Tidelands Trust and the State Lands Commission's view if Eastview Little League wishes to approach the Port of Los Angeles to for the purposed of purchasing the land atop Knoll Hill for Eastview's use.

Apparently, nobody has even started talking about what the land is worth or whether Eastview's management/owners have the money to buy the property.

The basic explanation as to why Eastview can't remain on the site is that the site must serve the public with regard to activities related to the waters of California, the tidelands, and for the benefit of members of the public who have a real interest in the water areas of the State, or can provide proof that the uses of the tidelands property supports the public uses of the waterways.

Since there would be no way to create the scenario that little league baseball supports water activities, waterfront enjoyment, waterfront activities, or public benefit of the Trust's uses, then it cannot remain on Knoll Hill.

Someone got up and actually attempted to suggest that since Knoll Hill is near the cruise ship terminal, potential passengers to the cruise ships may find that baseball being played atop Knoll Hill would mean that some of those passengers might eventually wish to have younger family members play with Eastview Little League.

I looked at the fellow sitting next to me and we both stated at the exact same time, "That's a stretch."

So it looks like no matter how many Eastview supporters demand that the fields remain, they will most probably lose their rights to have league play on Knoll Hill after the agreement ends.

It was pointed out by one of the first commentors that Eastview knowingly agreed and signed contracts for a specific period of time and that they knew they had to leave Knoll Hill at the end of the agreement they signed.

So now what?

According to the folks running the meeting, in March, the four Alternatives will be whittled down to the one illustration that will go forward with more planning.

Eastview Little League can contact the Port of Los Angeles to inquire whether they would be willing to sell the top of Knoll Hill to private parties. Those private parties would then have the right to lease land to Eastview for whatever they wish to charge.

Eastview may also wish to contact the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and the Los Angeles County Department of Sanitation concerning Eastview Park.

Eastview Park is a park within the limits of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes that a very small minority of residents of Rancho Palos Verdes have ever been to or even know where it is.

Eastview Park is sitting on land owned by the County Department of Sanitation.

Eastview Park was a site considered for soccer fields by AYSO but apparently local residents of that area objected to its use for soccer fields.

Eastview Little League started out as a league primarily made up of boys living in San Pedro Highlands, the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County, now called "Eastview", boys from Channel Heights, and some others from the northern part of San Pedro.

Over the years as the Midtown League and fields folded, more boys from San Pedro joined the league.

Females were added to the league and that added participation.

Peck Park had an older league back in the early 1960's as well as several other areas, including Midtown. Block field had a league, too.

Eastview grew as other leagues folded or there were not enough fields in the area.

But that was then and this is now.

Interested folks probably need to continue meeting about Knoll Hill as the Eastview folks finally realize that there would be a new legal fight if they continue to demand keeping the temporary fields they themselves agreed to.

Folks may wish to continue to help decide which of the many amenities suggested for Knoll Hill should be included in the final build out.

One of the very best comments heard during the meeting is that there should be a memorial to I.L.W.U. members at Knoll Hill overlooking the harbor they toiled in for so many years.

Perhaps a permanent memorial with information about Bloody Thursday can be placed up on top of the hill.

I know Knoll Hill overlooked the old Standard Oil Marine Terminal and Todd Shipyard, so maybe memories for the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Energy Union my dad belonged to could be placed up there along with all the trade unions that built and repaired ships at Todd Shipyard and other shipyards.

As for who may use Knoll Hill the most, perhaps it is the residents of northeast San Pedro including folks living in Rancho San Pedro, and other areas closer to Knoll Hill than the new park on 22nd Street.

It may be a good place for couples to have an outdoor wedding overlooking the harbor with a situation that calls for reservations of the space and fees charged.

The most obvious sight that everybody will see all long Front Street directly across from Knoll Hill is stacked containers, railroad cars, and A-Frame cranes. Oh boy!

But there will be views of the bridge, the fountain, and quite a bit of the Main Channel and parts of downtown San Pedro and Terminal Island.

Is it going to meet the wishes of everyone? No. But it may meet the wishes of the majority of the residents who will actually use the space one everything is rebuilt.

With so many youngsters participating in soccer, baseball, karate, football, basketball, and other organized sports leagues and organizations, perhaps they should be allowed more free play and recreational activities that are not structured by other, but by their individual parents and friends.


Anonymous said...

I wholeheartedly agree with the statement made from one of the attendees at the Knoll Hill Meeting:

"Eastview knowingly agreed and signed contracts for a specific period of time and that they knew they had to leave Knoll Hill at the end of the agreement they signed."

Yet, why oh WHY am I NOT surprised they'd try like the devil to change their TUNE?

Eastview, PLEASE, dust off your spectacles and READ the fine print (AGAIN)

Anonymous said...

the genius who suggested tournaments would bring players from cruise ships was jack baric

M Richards said...

I worked with Jack on Janice Hahn's CAC for Ponte Vista.

He could have said that little league players sometimes dring sports drinks, soda, and even bottled water during their games.

Water is a basic ingredient in harbors.

Since ball players consume some water and water is part of the harbor overlooking Knoll Hill, there is a connection between little league and the available uses of tidelands.

Or perhaps:

The largest number of things that would be viewed by everyone on Knoll Hill are containers.

Containers are sometimes transported by ocean going ships.

The ocean is made up of water.

So ball players would be looking at containers sometimes transported on ships moving in water.

Or perhaps:

Cruise ship passengers and little league ball players sometimes drink the same type of sports drinks, sodas, juices, and water.

Cruise ship passengers use the harbor and ocean to enjoy the cruise.

The harbor and ocean are made up of the transportation means that cruise ships use.

Little league players can see the cruise ships when they are in port, floating on water, while they sometimes drink liquids made up primarily of water.

Both little league players and cruise ship passengers rely on water at certain times.

If a ball player takes a break and goes to their parent and gets a Gatorade to drink, perhaps somewhere on a cruise ship or somewhere else in the harbor or somewhere on the ocean, someone else is drinking Gatorade at the very same time, there is a connection made.

Of perhaps:

Folks are reaching out for the slimest straws in the haystack to try and keep Eastview Little League on a site it promised to vacate after its three-year agreement, signed by Eastview management and supported by Eastview parents, ended.

km said...

The Port has made it very clear that they have no intention of selling any part of Knoll Hill. However, I do find it interesting that now the EVLL board would like to know the purchase price of the land when, before, they couldn't even afford to buy a fence for the Navy parcel.

Anonymous said...

well, EVLL now has $250k from Target that they can use

M Richards said...

Thanks for you comment Anonymous 9:58 AM

It EVLL has the buck, I wonder if they will use it for a lawyer to fight to remain where they agreed to vacate.

There is a particular publisher in town who has opined that EVLL should go to ball fields at Ponte Vista.

It that were to happen, OUR community would have to consider quite a few MORE units on the site, rather than a less unreasonable number of units.

I would hope however, that if Target really gave EVLL all that money, the management would provide a program for under priveledged kids to get outfitted with uniforms and entrance fees to participate in Eastview Little League for the remaining time they have left on their agreed to lease on Knoll Hill.

When the league calls for cleats on T-Ball players' shoes, I think some wasteful spending is undertaken.

How many players are participating in Eastview Little League because their parents want them to or as an ego boost for those parents?

I only played one season because I got tired of all those other 8 and 9 year old pitchers hitting me with pitched baseballs.

Even for a 9-year old, it still hurt.

Anonymous said...

SP community folks that disagree with EVLL attempting to remain on Knoll Hill (even though the agreement they signed stated otherwise) had best start verbalizing same to Hahn's office, the POLA, and other PTB NOW, rather than later because EVLL is panicking and, as we all know, will resort to various "tactics" including intimidation and will stoop to that ever-whiney:

"PLEASE, please, think of the kids"

EVLL is primarily a group of parents that live through their kids - and, like kids, attempt manipulation - and, live life in a Disneyland mentality that fluctates from (sorry to say long gone) "Mr. Toad's Wild Ride" to (in the case of the agreement they signed) "Sleeping Beauty"

R. Galosic said...

R. Galosic said...

This link was passed on to me to read this posting, and again, as so many times during the past few years, it is so sad to see that some people just do not get it. This is not about the greedy parents; this is about the kids of today, tomorrow, and the future, and saving the only organization in San Pedro known as "Little League". I currently do not play "Little League", nor have any one of my kids played for over five years now, yet I support saving "Little League" for OUR town.

I do not agree with them, but I really think I almost understand where the group that opposes this is coming from. Sure, I can see how those that oppose seem upset that Eastview signed an agreement saying they would vacate Knoll Hill at the agreements end, and now are trying to find a way to stay, but I ask you, would you have done anything different if this was the last ditch effort in saving an organization you were passionate about? Signing the agreement was like this, “You sign on the dotted line, or you league ends tomorrow.” I have no doubt; every one of you would have done the same. Folks, the bottom line here is that “San Pedro” needs a place for “Little League” to call its home, and while some may be convinced otherwise, Eastview’s volunteers are not part of an organization that is “Loaded” with cash nor does not have an “Owner”, and it is not a “Managed Business”. What Eastview is though, it is a group of volunteers that changes from year to year that organizes a place for kids to go and learn life’s lessons in a group setting.

If you never played in the organization that is nationally known as "Little League", or if you did and you stopped because you were hit be a ball as a child and were afraid to ever get back up in the batters box, you don't realize how many kids lives it changes. "Little League" keeps kids off the streets, and out of open space parks where they can experiment with drugs and drink alcohol with their buddies. "Little League" gives kids a place to be part of a group that plays together for (6) months of the year, learning work ethics and how to play with a team in a group setting.

This is not about me, who as last years President, as I said earlier has not had a child play there in five years, or about any other parent who stood before you. What it is though, it is about preserving an organization that thousands of volunteers in San Pedro have volunteered to keep together for the kids of San Pedro since 1967.

Eastview Little League by no way is a "Business" as you suggest, and there is no "Ownership", only Volunteers who through the years step up and help organize a place for kids to play each and every year.

So remember this, when you are putting up your fight to have the fields removed, remember that consciously or un-consciously, you are trying your best to end "Little League" in San Pedro. If that’s fine with you then okay, but remember we volunteers will not stop because we want to be sure that our Grandchildren and Great Grandchildren have a "Little League to play in OUR town of San Pedro.

Anonymous said...

Jack Baric here...first I want to clarify my point about using the fields as a cruise ship tourist attraction in conjunction with the fields since it seems to have confused some people. It's very simple: A cruise ship company has a deal with an event planner to put on adult softball or kids baseball tournaments throughout the year in a package that includes a weekend cruise before or after the tournament concludes...anyone who has ever been in a lobby of a hotel in Vegas sees how that town is very successful at doing this and could be a nice attraction for vacations for families that are sports active...

Second, what I should have said is that those fields are most needed by the kids in the neighborhood that Toberman and B&G Club serve. We need every tool possible to give those kids positive activities and anyone that would argue that a passive park would do better for those kids is not being realistic.

M Richards said...

Thanks Jack, for your comment.

Does anyone know if Eastview Little League offers 'scholarships' or funds for truly underpriveledged kids to be able to afford the uniforms and fees required to play in the League?

Perhaps if the community learns how inclusive Eastview Little League might be, many may have a better opinion of the group.

I don't know if uniting cruise ship lines with baseball events on Knoll Hill would help the situation.

On one hand, families attending pre or post cruise baseball events in San Pedro might spend more money in OUR community, and in downtown San Pedro in particular.

I am all for that concept.

It may be something to create fields in part of the Ports O Call parking area, so there could be a tie in with that venue, sporting events, cruises, and shopping.

That area is still on tidelands, but there certainly many 'permanent' buildings and structures in that area.

Would a cruise line/sporting tie in require more than one baseball field? I don't know.

If there has been cruise ship/sporting events in the past, did Eastview Little League allow the use of the fields on Capitol.

Did Eastview allow the Boys and Girls Clubs and Toberman to use the fields on Capitol in the past?

Mr. Baric's comments did seem a bit akward when he first presented them, but with his latest comment, it seems more reasonable and even possible, IF enough fields can be found.

Mr. Baric's tie in with the cruise ship industry does imply that events on Knoll Hill could be considered as related to the port, but much more discussion is needed.

I don't have any real problem if that type of consideration is really considered and it can be worked out to be a benefit for everyone.

I have opined that I certainly don't mind one field remaining on Knoll Hill.

I think I can be possitive to having one more field up there if a true tie in can be proven and all groups interested in using two fields have equal opportunities to use the fields.

I don't feel that one organization should have more rights than any other organization unless they pay more for the use of the fields or they are part of the cruise ship tie in that would bring more revenue to San Pedro.

Restaurants could create packages for families attending tournaments.

Hotels in the area could offer discounts.

The Chamber of Commerce could work with groups to supply transportation to recreational and entertainment venues in the greater L.A. area.

Mr. Baric's opinions can be considered as a way of establishing San Pedro as a destination rather than as just a transportation hub.

More discussions can help everyone, it looks like.

I'm liking Jack's idea the more I ponder it. How about you?

R. Galosic said...

To clear something else up,
Eastview Little League, by Little League rules, has NEVER turned away a player because his family can't pay the fees to play. NEVER! In having 9 years on the board, I can tell you that every year anonymously we would place at least 20 players on teams who's families could not afford to pay the fees.

Last year while I was President, I started a program at Eastview that we call our "All Kids Play" program. This program is designed for individuals or companies to donate money to help families less fortunate to help them offset the fees for Eastview.

So to answer your earlier question, yes we do have a program in place to help less fortunate families, and yes, we have done this forever.

Anonymous said...

Jack Baric here again...Mark, it feels like Ponte Vista all over again, doesn't it? One thing I can say is you were always fair on that CAC and I appreciate your willingness to hear new ideas...

Regarding Eastview scholarship: Yes, they have a program called All Kids Play that last year raised approx $10K so that kids who cannot afford to play got the chance to do so. And I know that Eastview officers have had meetings with top officials at Toberman and B&G to discuss how those organizations can use the fields. I also hope to connect Eastview to the YMCA for the same purpose.

I have also been speaking to the family member of a popular SPHS teen killed by gang members about including a foundation they are starting to help pay for kids to play at Knoll Hill...we can do a lot of good here if we quit fighting and look for the positive solutions that our community, (especially east of Gaffey) needs.

M Richards said...

Thank so much Ron and Jack!

It is great that "All Kids Play" and I think that could be publicized so that there could be less opposition in the community.

If we all can ponder options that could work for everyone, that would benefit everyone, too.

If you can use help looking towards Eastview Park, I'd like to help consider that.

The Sanitation District will probably owe San Pedro something because they will be working in the greater San Pedro for eight years, probably beginning in 2012.

The fact that only the parts of the South Shores section of San Pedro utilize the L.A.County Sanitation District's facilities means San Pedrans may be imposed on for something they will not benefit from.

The vast majority of the poop in San Pedro goes to the Terminal Island, city of L.A. treatment plant and NOT to the site in Carson.

I think if we look at the amount of park and open space in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, we will find lots and lots of park spaces and open spaces.

I wonder if working with the city of Rancho Palos Verdes might be easier than tackling the Port of Los Angeles, the city of Los Angeles, and the State of California.

Couldn't hurt to try, could it?

Anonymous said...

Regarding R. Galosic's POV/rebuttal:

Contracts are drawn up for a primary reason: - CLARITY.

In the real world - when contracts are breached, there are consequences. I feel that is the primary reason why so many folks in town are opposed to what EVLL is now attempting to do. Why should EVLL be considered "special"? EVLL is certainly not the only special interest group in town - nor is it the only SPORTS group in town. It is, to me, as if EVLL deliberately signed a contract with NO intentions of living up to it - I MUST assume that those that signed it had EVERY intention of attempting to breach/manipulate it.

Anonymous said...

In addition to the $250K from Target, EVLL was given $75K from the Annenberg Foundation. This money is in addition to the money that was spent by the Harbor Department to build the fields on Knoll Hill.

R. Galosic said...

With regard to comments made by Anonymous:

You seem to be a very cold person when it comes to dealing with the Children of our San Pedro community. The Children are the future that will keep this town going strong when you and I are long gone... Why is Eastview a little different you ask? How many service organizations in town that cater to our Children, can you tell me have been around and been a strong community presence for almost 50 years??? Not too many, so I guess Eastview is and should be a pretty special part of this town, right???

Anonymous said...

It is silly when people claim Eastview "breached" or "broke" its agreement. Eastview is in year 2 of a 3 year deal. I doubt the agreement required Eastview to waive its First Amendment right to speak at public meetings. I hope they will continue to exercise their First Amendment rights on behalf of the kids who play on those fields. I think those fields are really neat.

M Richards said...

Thanks Anonymous 10:18 PM.

If I have written that EVLL has breached its contract yet, I apologize and I do know that the current contract is still living and not set to expire at this time.

You are also correct that free speech is important and that EVLL has not yet breached any contract with the Port of Los Angeles, as far as I am aware of.

EVLL gets to use the fields for the duration of its current contract that is not up yet.

It is also true that EVLL supporters do have the right to voice their opinions as long as they do not impair the rights of others to voice their opinions.

The current three fields on Knoll Hill may be neat, but they were also contracted to be temporary.

The three fields may currently welcome EVLL players and others, but when the current contract expires, then none of us truly knows what will happen.

I am sad that so few supporters of Eastview Little League have not actively joined in to suggest or learn about alternative sites to Knoll Hill.

The implecation MAY seem that EVLL is using tactics that only allow for keeping the fields on Knoll Hill and that may not help anyone, in the long run.

Where are Eastview supporters on efforts to find other locations?

Why didn't Eastview supporters voice opinions about sites other than Knoll Hill at the last community meeting?

Where are the voices that acknowledge that Knoll Hill is a temporary location and that it may never become a more permanent location for EVLL?

When folks voice their opinions and the vast majority of the voiced opinions demand that EVLL remain on Knoll Hill, what does that say about those folks who aren't willing to voice the fact that Knoll Hill is contracturally temporary and that other sites need to be considered?

Everyone has the right to voice their opinions, but it seems odd that so many folks have exactly the same opinion as Eastview's management without regard to knowing that other sites should be considered.

Please do not continue to put all your eggs in one basket and demand that the community hold your basket, for the sake of the kids.

EVLL management made their beds several times without fully realizing that they should have looked at alternative beds along the way.

What happens the day after the current contract runs out and no new contract to have fields anywhere else is on the horizon or actively being worked on?

I have to encourage all folks who truly feel the kids of our community are important in their quests to play organized baseball, that the adults use all of their abilities to find all options for fields, rather than pinning their demands on keeping Knoll Hill.

Unfortunately, the history of EVLL management and supporters seems to suggest that they want what they want and the rest of the community be damned.

That is not a wonderful approach to take when an organization has to go begging throughout the community to find fields when they should have been preparing for all eventualities that could come about the day we all first heard that DiCarlo's was closing down.

The preparedness of EVLL management to deal with needing to find permanent homes has been lacking for years and years, it seems and their first attempts to sign up with Bob Bisno was a troubling example of how EVLL management will sell out the community for their own benefit.

When only 17 of the 600 families supported EVLL and Bob's first agreement, that should have been a real wake-up call.

It was a good thing that most EVLL supporters told Bob to pound sand last year when he offered fields no strings attached.

But still I think EVLL management would serve kids and their parents better by looking at all options, including Eastview Park AND working much harder to get the Field Of Dreams going, much quicker than it is progressing now.

Use your voices suggesting many options. Don't demand what may be not legal, but only temporary.

If we all truly are wanting to support kids, shouldn't we all suggest many options and work in more directions than just keeping fields atop Knoll Hill?

R.Galosic said...

It is a very sad comentary that you have no idea what a group from Eastview has been doing for over five years now to find a new home. Not looking for new field options, are you kidding me? I can name twenty that have all come up empty. I am sorry you are so mis-informed and have no clue as to what has been in the works to find a new home for the past five years. But keep writing that we are selfish because we attend meetings that were put together so that the community can say what they would like to have done on Knoll Hill. Why should one's opinion about having three fields for the community not be listened to and considered? You have your dream of what it should be like, what is wrong with us having ours???????????????

M Richards said...

Mr. Galosic,

I actually have kept up with several of the attempts by Eastview Little League to find a permanent home.

When the management was unsuccessful in trying to get more families to support Bob Bisno's plans in exchange for Bob's promise that he would provide fields, it demonstrated to many in the community that Eastview's management would stoop to ignore the larger community in efforts to secure a permanent location for the League.

When the then Eastview Management entered into the agreement with Bob they basically sold all of us out and that we would be required to put up with an overly large residential development so, in part, Eastview Little League could have permanent fields.

Thank goodness that only 17 families bought into Eastview management's willingness to sign with Bob over protecting all of the residents of San Pedro, including all of the kids who live in the area.

There were a very large number of folks who announced via many forms of communication that they had lost all faith in Eastview's Management and as long as the same folks who brokered the first deal with Bob continue to manage Eastview Little League, you can surely bet that there will be a very large number of residents who have no trust in the folks who manage Eastview Little League.

The best thing for Eastview Little League is to request that every single member of the management team who participated in dealings with Bob Bisno to secure permanent fields for the kids would be to resign from any positions related to Eastview Little League.

With new management, I can assure you that there will be a newfound effort to find permanent fields for the kids.

It is supposed to be about the kids, Mr. Galosic and you can read my own suggestions and ideas related to attempting to find permanent fields for Eastview Little League in the area.

What more depths might the Eastview Management team attempt to secure permanent fields for players? If they were willing to support Bob's outrageous plans that would have created many nightmares for decades in OUR community, especially for folks living near Western Avenue or needing to use Western Avenue.

My suggestion that Eastview Management approach responsible and reasonable folks in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and the L.A. County Sanitation Districts to look at acquiring Eastview Park for permanent fields also demonstrates that I consider having permanent fields for Eastview Little League closer to my home than they ever have been, a sign that I do wish to help find permanent fields for Eastview.

Please take a good, hard look at my latest post regarding sports facilities in the area. Please read that I made absolutely no statement in support of oppositiion to finding more facilities for youths in OUR community.

Please Mr. Galosic and others, look at the numbers of sites where youth can participate in organized activities and tell me that there are fewer places for kids to play at than there are facilities for kids to swim competetively, shoot hoops in an organized team or even play with all their might on soccer fields.

When you or anyone else considers that organized youth baseball is under represented in terms of the number of fields that actually exist in the area, compared to other types of fields and courts, it simply doesn't compute.

Shouldn't we support all types of organized youth sports in OUR community?

What makes Little League more special than basketball, competitive swimming, and even soccer?

Is Lomita Little League packed with kids? Must all Lomita Little League players live in Lomita?

Why can't folks get together and set up some kind of sharing on the very large grassy area just east of Gaffey.

Like I have written time before, it is not a good idea to condemn somwthing if I am not willing to offer possible solutions or ideas that may not have been looked at before.

The folks who signed up with Bob Bisno when he attempted to gather more approval for his giant monster, using kids and their parents as bait was made so much worse by the Eastview Management team which tried to work out the deal with Bob in the first place.

I know about what happened after Bob made his pitch because I talked to Bob several times about the matter.

I have watched and considered Eastview Little League's plight since I first learned that the bakery was closing because I am a former player with the League and I actually care about all kids in OUR community, even Eastview Little League players.

When Eastview's Management organizes folks to come to meetings and make their comments and demands while 'talking down' to critics of whatever they want, WHEN THEIR OWN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT, it sets a very bad example how a mob-like demonstration using demands to the very kids who need permanent fields.

You may want to get with that Scott Lane fellow and let him know he does absolutely no good when he did what he did at the last Knoll Hill meeting.

Mr. Galosic, what is Eastview's Management doing to provide permanent homes on a site other than Knoll Hill?

If they are holding all their cards for Knoll Hill, I think that may not be the best option at this time.

I understand that there may be 600 families who want their kids playing with Eastview Little League.

I happen to support and encourage one little almost-5-year old to enjoy playing with EVLL and I am looking forward to watching his very first T-ball game in March.

I want any and every kid who wants to play with Eastview Little League to have that chance this season and every single season beyond this season.

But I also need to remind everyone that reality suggests that Knoll Hill is not necessarily the place where EVLL will end up after the contract runs out.

It is true that everyone can discuss freely what they want to see, and I am discussing more options than just Knoll Hill.

It may be tough and it may be necessary for Eastview Little League to share facilities or even break up the different levels of teams and have them play apart, on other fields.

I have also contended that I see absolutely no reason that one large diamond should not remain on Knoll Hill.

I know it is only one field and that is two too few for many, with regards to EVLL, but we all need to look at all options and live with what we can live with.

Back in my day, there were the Minors and the Majors and there may have been the Intermediates.

Perhaps the T-Ball players may have to find a home on a smaller diamond and all of the levels may have to play during the parts of the year when other Little Leagues aren't using local fields.

How many other families in OUR community have kids playing in Leagues other than Eastview?

How many other families in OUR community have no kids wishing to play organized Little League?

How many families in OUR community don't have kids wishing to play any organized competitive sports?

Should Eastview Little League have more athority to demand public land for a private organization, even though that organization turns down no kids and helps pay for their equipment and play?

For years after I played with EVLL, I participated in organized sports in OUR community and I was a member of the S.P.H.S. Cross Country Team and the Bee Track Team for one season.

I have played organized sports and I appreciated being able to do so.

I also sat first seat in the C.S.U.L.B. Freshmen Eight one year.

I feel I have enough education in organized sports activities to understand that EVLL is looking for a permanent home and I have offered help and options even though I continue to detest what Eastview's Managemend did with Bob Bisno.

So let's all work together to try and find permanent fields for EVLL and allow one field to remain on Knoll Hill so more members of OUR community can enjoy a game or two.

It is my current opinion that as long as EVLL continues to call for keeping all three fields on Knoll Hill and that they be designated as the League that is allowed to use those fields during the historic time of year Little Leagues are playing, they may end up with zero permanent fields and the ONLY folks who would be blamed for that would be the EVLL Management and supporters.

I'll continue to help all that I can, even after I felt royally screwed by Eastview's Management for their dealings with Bob Bisno and the posibility of their screwing all of OUR community just to have three permanent fields at Ponte Vista.

As a former member of the CAC and as someone who knows quite a bit about Bob Bisno, Bisno Development, the history and the current situations revolving around Ponte Vista, when EVLL Management made their bed with Bob, they were never going to get those fields in the first place.

But lie with Bob they did and that is unforgiveable to me and hundreds if not thousands of folks who live in OUR community.

But as I am still interested in helping OUR community's kids, I will continue to offer positive suggestions on places where permanent fields might be found.

Anonymous said...

I simply could not agree more beautifully written!