Hermosa Beach City Council flags $60 million CIP shortfall, prioritizes urgent repairs

Hermosa Beach City Council on May 28 received a study session report showing a sharp reduction in one‑time funding for capital projects and a growing backlog of deferred maintenance that staff estimated at roughly $60 million.

Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker told the council that the city historically relied on year‑end surpluses, ARPA carryforwards and vacancy savings to fund CIP work but those sources have been largely exhausted. "These sources have largely been exhausted, and we do not project the surplus to replenish the CIP fund this year or projected for next fiscal year," Walker said.

Joe, the city presenter who led the CIP review, said staffing capacity is also constrained and that Public Works is "completely full" for the next two years, limiting the city’s ability to deliver projects even where funding exists. He identified several high‑priority, underfunded projects that staff recommends emphasizing: the City Yard renovation, municipal pier repairs, stormwater (dry‑well) compliance, pavement preservation and community center window replacement. "Many are reaching what I'll say is the end of the road," Joe said of deferred projects.

Staff outlined estimated shortfalls and cost notes: roughly $4 million of additional near‑term pier repairs beyond the highest‑priority panel work, community center window replacement underfunded by about $2.5 million, the stormwater dry‑well project preliminarily estimated at about $4 million, and a multi‑year city‑wide CIP underfunding staff summarized as "almost $60 million." Walker and Joe described the $20 million figure for City Yard as a very rough order‑of‑magnitude pending environmental and remediation work.

Public commenters pressed the council to adopt revenue measures to sustain the CIP. "We are standing, staring down enormous infrastructure needs," said Elaine, a resident, urging the council to consider multiple revenue tools rather than relying on visitors' spending. Earlier in public comment, Elk W. opposed installing parking meters on Monterey Boulevard, saying, "Monterey Boulevard is not a revenue opportunity. It's a neighborhood."

Staff recommended shifting two projects to the deferred/unfunded list: the Comprehensive Downtown Lighting Study (replaced by lower‑cost pilot options such as string lights in the center palms and an LED retrofit test) and the Tsunami Siren project, which staff said has partial FEMA funding but would still be several hundred thousand dollars short to provide a primary beach siren system. Joe said a FEMA award of about $75,000 plus a $25,000 city match has been obtained for a community‑center‑based secondary system, but the full primary system along the beach remains unfunded and long delayed by the county.

The report also documented grant and external‑agency dependencies: a nearly $5 million potential Metro contribution for a long‑standing PCH Aviation Mobility project, upcoming Caltrans resurfacing on PCH, and LA County sanitation sewer‑lining work that will require city engineering oversight. Staff warned that grant timelines and outside agencies’ schedules impose fixed work windows that reduce flexibility.

Councilmembers asked technical and policy questions about resurfacing methods, lighting tests on Pier Avenue, options for temporary window fixes at the community center, and whether the city should pursue bonding if new revenue became available. Joe and Walker repeatedly said staff will focus on advancing critical phases of a smaller set of projects and continue to seek competitive grant funding, but that without new ongoing revenue the city will face difficult tradeoffs and ongoing deferrals.

The council formally moved to receive and file the CIP study session report; Councilmember Rob made the motion, it was seconded, and the motion passed 5–0. The roll call earlier in the meeting recorded Councilmembers Simon, Francois, Jackson, Mayor Pro Tem Keegan and the presiding Mayor as present.

What happens next: staff will refine scopes, pursue targeted grants and return with more detailed cost and scope estimates; the council can direct which projects to prioritize for any limited new funding or revenue options that may be proposed in the broader budget process.