The city’s decision to remove the three-decade-old structure has been met with mixed reactions. Photo: Court Documents
Despite strong opposition by Palos Verdes residents, the city’s elected officials decided on Tuesday to move forward with the plan to demolish the illegal stone fort at Lunada Bay. The unanimous decision came shortly after the California Coastal Commission pressured the city to remove the fort occupied by “fiercely territorial surfers” or acquire permission by presenting a bevy of measures to improve public access and reduce harassment.
Prior to the council’s decision, a federal class-action lawsuit was laid on the infamous Bay Boys last March, alleging that their gang-like intimidation, vandalism, and harassment of outsiders denies surfers access to the public break. Critics of the gang also accuse the Bay Boys of congregating at this three-decade-old stone structure, where some say they frequently use drugs and alcohol.
During a City Council meeting Tuesday, there was mixed reactions.
Opponents of the city’s verdict embrace the site as a community landmark, asserting that it’s frequently used for weddings and memorial services. Furthermore, they insist that the public has the distorted perception of who the Bay Boys really are.
Lunada Bay. Photo: Levin
“It’s not a gang. It is a club,” said resident Pat Stolz, who is urging the city not to tear it down. “We don’t want crowds. Think twice when someone comes in and tells you what to do.”
Stanton Hunton, another resident of PV, told the LA Times that the Bay Boys are “very pleasant people,” and urged the council members to not “succumb to the Coastal Commission.” He continued by saying the city should also block a Coastal Commission proposal to improve public access with better pathways, benches, viewing binoculars, and other amenities.
“Why the city would allow the Coastal Commission to strong-arm it to allow in nonresidents who don’t know the perils of that cliff is beyond me,” he continued.
City attorneys said that keeping structure would mean that the city is responsible for maintaining it and assuming liability for anyone who is hurt there.
“The truth of the matter is that the city does not want to own a structure like this. We can’t afford to own a structure like this,” said Councilman James D Vandever.
Another meeting to discuss the issue is planned for September.
