Mailbag: The Surf Museum’s new home comes at the public’s expense

Re: H.B. International Surfing Museum Moves to New Home Inside Main Street library July, 29

Betrayal and treachery are ugly words. Yet those are appropriate to describe the feeling many have toward the Huntington Beach City Council’s Casey McKeon, Pat Burns and Gracey Van Der Mark when visiting the newly opened Surf Museum in the Main Street Library.

Beautiful Surf City surely needs a functioning surf museum. But for some reason the Surf Museum that existed from 1990 to 2025 never thrived. For example, management (the museum is a private nonprofit corporation) failed to make rent and appears to have fallen nearly one year in arrears.

In 2025, then-Mayor Pat Burns and his sidekicks on the council, McKeon and Van Der Mark, began to formally move toward injecting the long-suffering museum into the Main Street Library.

With a mélange of unfounded reasoning, they suggested this move would revitalize the museum, the library and the nearby Art Center. Yet many savvy people speculated that the idea of mixing a Surf Museum into a public library was wrong and done out of spite.

Council members portrayed the Surf Museum as an easily accommodated, rent-paying addition to the public library. The truth is that the museum, contrary to promises and plans, now occupies a significant portion of the main reading room.

Two former library rooms now appear dedicated to a museum, surf-art gallery and a gift shop. And the extraordinarily low $500-per-month rent works out to a rate of less than $.50 per square foot, compared with rents of $4 to $6 per square foot being charged for nearby Main Street retail space. That feels like a city rent subsidy.

As to the promise of this private corporation paying its way, whether a museum that previously struggled with its rent can now consistently pay even this deeply discounted $500 monthly charge remains to be seen, especially since the public library and, therefore, the museum charge no admission fees.

Buzz McCord
Huntington Beach

Surf City actually loses on both sides of this arrangement. We are known internationally as Surf City, and we deserve an actual dedicated museum that is large enough to properly display the rich history of surfing as it relates to Huntington Beach.

Additionally, the library deserves to have room for our community members who utilize the library’s rich resources continuously. Within the Main Street Library, our community has lost a huge amount of space that was previously utilized for quiet study, tutoring and various community activities such as story time, book club, children’s programming, etc.

Lastly, the used book store was greatly impacted by this decision. The large space provided books at a discounted rate for residents to browse, purchase or simply sit and read.

Many mothers would bring their children to select books, practice reading and enjoy the quiet space with the windows open onto the muted sounds on Main Street. Now, the store is reduced to one wall within the shared computer room, and a stroller can barely fit inside.

This shared space concept is confusing for visitors and residents of the city. Is it a library or a museum? The library is closed on Sunday and Monday, Sunday being a prime day to visit a museum.

Will the city then adjust the library hours with the result being additional staff and funding required? Why is the Surf Museum allowed to have rent set at below market rates? Perhaps it does not generate sustainable revenue?

Is this what the council meant by “running the city like a business?”
Sylvia Goodwin
Huntington Beach

An image of power poles along 16th St. claimed to depict a portion of Newport Heights, where some residents are pushing to underground utilities. But as Pilot readers point out, the location shown was not quite right.

(Don Leach | Staff Photographer)

Re Renewed effort to underground utilities in Newport Heights is underway (Aug. 14)

Which is better for Newport Heights — underground or above ground? My answer is above ground. Southern California Edison (SCE) has a longstanding above ground initiative for areas not at high risk for fires.

The SCE reports that the main goals are to increase worker and public safety, to increase system reliability and to enhance our stewardship of the environment.

The latest effort at making homeowners pay upward of $50,000 for undergrounding is purely for improving the views of some people. It is wrong and has been rejected by Newport Heights homeowners seven times in the past 15 years. It is still wrong, and a complete waste of city time and money.
Richard Weiss
Newport Beach

Undergrounding image
The article about the effort to put utilities underground is interesting, and I think the plan is the right thing to do. Power lines are unsightly and potentially dangerous.

Few people may know that Lido Isle in Newport Beach was one of the first communities anywhere to install underground utilities almost a century ago. But the photo you have on the front page above your story shows power lines in Costa Mesa. Does the plan include a proposal to annex portions of that city?
Lenard Davis
Newport Beach

I am deeply disappointed with your choice of image used in your article about the undergrounding. You need to issue a correction. The picture you shared is of Costa Mesa and is a commercial business location.

The majority of utilities poles in Newport Heights are in alleys. I believe you are misleading Newport Heights residents regarding the power line situation.
Debbie Knost
Newport Heights

It seems to me that showing a picture of utility poles in the city of Costa Mesa with an article about undergrounding utilities in Newport Heights is extremely misleading information for residents seeking clarity on the issues.
Val Lyon
Newport Heights