Council approves $1.3M completion bond for Main Street Pier project after heated debate

The Huntington Beach City Council approved a $1.3 million completion bond for pier improvements at 21 and 22 Main Street on Jan. 20 after a contentious debate over project timelines and whether the leaseholder had fallen short of obligations.

Staff presented the completion bond, required under the executed lease with Surf City Partners LLC, noting the bond equals 100% of estimated construction costs and "creates no fiscal impact to the city." The planned improvements include a restaurant, renovated restrooms, a bait-and-tackle shop and storage. The lessee, identified in staff remarks as Keith Boer, attended the meeting and said his team had incurred significant out-of-pocket costs and was ready to begin demolition and construction once permits were issued.

Several councilmembers challenged whether the project had triggered default provisions in exhibit D of the lease, which lists construction milestones and completion dates the council said had not been met. Council members pressing for caution argued the city should verify contract alignment and consider a short delay to reconcile outstanding schedule and default concerns. "This project has been delayed since 2021," one member said, pointing to rent abatement and missing deliverables; another said approving the bond does not waive the city's right to pursue default remedies.

Other councilmembers argued delaying the bond would stall a project that has already secured Coastal Commission approvals and plan checks and would further postpone a restaurant and public restroom improvements the city expects to see. The lessee said plan-check rounds and interagency requirements had driven delays and that the team was weeks away from pulling a demolition permit.

After procedural votes on motions to table and requests for a project-alignment report, the council recorded a final decision to accept the completion bond with a 4-3 vote. Councilmembers who voted yes noted the bond protects the city (it can be called in the event of default) while allowing permitted construction to proceed; dissenters cited contract timelines and argued the council should first investigate potential defaults.

Why it matters: The vote clears a key step before building permits can issue for the pier project but leaves open unresolved questions about the lease's timelines and the city's enforcement options. The bond is framed by staff as a protective measure for taxpayers; opponents say approval without resolving alleged defaults could limit leverage to enforce timelines.

Next steps: Staff will administer the bond and proceed with permit issuance consistent with the lease and other conditions; council members signaled interest in follow-up reporting on schedule compliance and lease enforcement.