Environment & Sustainability

Amy T. Howorth supported environmental initiatives such as the Environmental Impact Report certification in 2014 [2], the Food Waste Recycling Program in 2015 and 2017 [7], and the Climate Action Plan in 2017 [10]. She also supported transitioning to 100% renewable energy in 2018 and 2020 [13][20]. In 2016, she supported opposition to the West Basin Desalination Plant proposal, emphasizing environmental protection [5]. In 2024, she raised concerns about improper disposal of pet waste in green bins [22].

Over time: Howorth shifted from a neutral stance on the Waste Management Contract in 2019 [18] to questioning transparency in a 2024 rate increase [24].

David Lesser supported groundwater treatment for long-term cost savings [9], supported opposing the West Basin Desalination Plant proposal in favor of alternatives like expanding recycled water capacity [6], and supported the 50% renewable energy tier to reduce the city's carbon footprint [14]. He opposed moving forward with an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pass-through agreement until zoning issues were resolved [16], and expressed concerns about specific goals in the Climate Action Plan (CAP), such as residential parking permits, while seeking clarity on policymaker review opportunities [11]. He also supported suspending the Strand Alcove Bench Program for review while acknowledging its creative intent [12], and supported staff analysis on energy efficiency standards [19].

Over time: David Lesser shifted from supporting the 50% renewable energy tier in 2018 [14] to expressing skepticism about gas appliance bans in 2025 while supporting staff research on fiscal implications [24].

In 2014, they supported opposing AB 2145 to protect the 2025 renewable energy initiative [1], and proposed setting a goal of 100% renewable energy while suggesting a subcommittee for further study [2]. They also argued the council had not sufficiently discussed EIR conditions [3]. In 2015, they called for testing external pollutant sources in the Enhanced Watershed Management Program [4]. In 2016, they requested a full briefing on the natural gas pipeline project's design and alternatives [5], and argued for CEQA review to ensure the least environmentally impactful route [6]. In 2017, they requested an EIR update for a desalination plant [7].

In 2017, they emphasized Manhattan Beach's leadership in climate action since 2007 and the urgency to meet the December 17th deadline for joining the CCA [1][2]. In 2018, they supported including a 20-gallon can in the RFP for waste management evaluation and suggested a six-month trial period for the Sustainability Task Force [3][4]. In 2019, they opposed transitioning to 100% renewable energy for city facilities due to cost concerns and questioned the toxicity of proposed organic pesticides [5][6]. In 2022, they supported increasing groundwater pumping for water conservation and questioned long-term pumping capacity [7][8].

Over time: They shifted from supporting short-term sustainability initiatives in 2018 [4] to opposing long-term renewable energy commitments in 2019 [5].