05/11/2010 F ILE, COPY
C►T Y
RAND TERR cE May 11,2010
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
California 92313-5295.
Civic Center(909)824-6621 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Fax(909)783-7629
Fax(909)783-2600
CRA/CITY COUNCIL
Maryetta Ferr6
Mayor REGULAR MEETINGS .
Lee Ann Garcia 2ND AND 4TH Tuesday - '6:00 p.m.Mayor Pro Tern
Bea Cortes
Walt Stancidewitz
Council Members
Betsy M.Adams _
City Manager
Council Chambers
Grand Terrace Civic Center
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5295
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS May 11,2010
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6:00 p.m.
22795 Barton Road
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990. IF YOU
REQUIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING,PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT
(909)824-6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
IF YOU DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING,PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO
SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO A MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA
WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT CITY HALL LOCATED AT
22795 BARTON ROAD DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. IN ADDITION,SUCH DOCUMENTS WILL BE POSTED ON
THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.CITYOFGRANDTERRACE.ORG
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-
* Pledge of Allegiance-
* Roll Call-
STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION ACTION
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. Approval of 04-27-2010 Minutes Approve
ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL
1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Water Awareness Poster Contest Winners-Terrace View
Elementary School
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine
noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time
without discussion. Any Council Member,Staff Member,or Citizen
may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for
discussion.
A. Approve Check Register Dated 05-11-2010 Approve
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
C. Approval of 04/27/2010 Minutes Approve
COUNCIL AGENDA
05-11-2010 PAGE 2 OF 2
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
D. Historical&Cultural Activities Committee Minutes of April Accept
5,2010
E. Emergency Operations Committee Minutes of April 6,2010 Accept
F. Community Emergency Response Team(C.E.R.T.)Minutes Accept
of March 2,2010 and April 6,2010
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on any
items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of restrictions
contained in California Law,the City Council may not discuss or act
on any item not on the agenda,but may briefly respond to statements
made or ask a question for clarification. The Mayor may also
request a brief response from staff to questions raised during public
comment or may request a matter be agendized for a future meeting.
5. COUNCIL REPORTS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Resolution-Swertfeger Equipment- Modification or Approve
Revocation of Conditional Use Permit 99-01, 99-01A2 and
99-01A3,Located at 12438 Michigan Street
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Second Reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No.6 Approve
to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community
Redevelopment Project Area
8. NEW BUSINESS-None
9. CLOSED SESSION
A. Labor Negotiations(GC 54957.6)Conference with Labor
Negotiator-Betsy M.Adams Representing Unrepresented
Employees
B. Conference with Legal Counsel- Potential Litigation-
GC54956.9(b)(2)and GC54956.9(c)
ADJOURN
THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD
ON TUESDAY, MAY 25,2010,AT 6:00 P.M.
...........................................................................................................................
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN
WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE NO LATER THAN
14 CALENDAR DAYS PRECEDING THE MEETING.
PENDING CRA APPROVAL
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27,2010
A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in
the Council Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,
on April 27, 2010 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferr6, Chairman
Lee Ann Garcia, Vice-Chairman
Walt Stanckiewitz, Agency Member
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Bernie Simon, Finance Director
Joyce Powers, Community&Economic Development Director
Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Sgt. Espinoza, Sheriff's Department
John Salvate, San Bernardino County Fire Department
ABSENT: Bea Cortes, Agency Member
�1
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 6:00 P.M.
APPROVAL OF 04-13-2010 MINUTES
CRA-2010-21 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GARCIA, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (AGENCY MEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT), to approve the April 13, 2010 Community Redevelopment Agency
Minutes.
REVISED COST ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW BASEBALL
FIELD
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street,questioned if everyone is forgetting that you basically
gave away part of our access to a park for our baseball diamonds to the high school and now
you want to spend more money that you don't have to make up for that. That is what this
seems like to me.
CRA-2010-22 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GARCIA, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (AGENCY MEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT), to direct Staff to proceed with the project with the following two
provisions:
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO. I
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 2
1 - To keep the cost down and not to exceed $330,660.00
2- To have discussions with Southern California Edison requesting more
assistance from them as we go through the process.
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY
COUNCIL
1. Joint Public Hearing on Amendment No.6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand
Terrace Community Redevelopment Project
Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for
Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Revised Grand Terrace
Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City-wide
Ordinance Certifying Amendment No, 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand
Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area
Mayor Ferre opened the Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Public
Hearing. The purpose of this Joint Public Hearing is to discuss Amendment No. 6 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project. In the form
of the amended and restated redevelopment plan. The City Council and Redevelopment
Agency are separate legal entities under State Law and in this case though the members of
the City Council also sit as members ofthe Redevelopment Agency and have each consented
to hold a j oint public hearing. The public hearing will be conducted as follows,first the staff
will give a presentation on the proposed amendment and related documents. After the staff
presentation then any written correspondence received by the City Clerk will be reviewed.
Finally the members of the public that would like to speak may do so and any one wishing
to speak needs to complete a request to speak card and hand it to the City Clerk. Those who
wish to speak should state their,name,address and organization if applicable for our record.
We ask that you limit your comments to three minutes.
Community and Economic Development Department Powers, stated that over the past 20
years, the Agency has undertaken significant work toward achieving the goals of the
Redevelopment Plan. Although there are many successes on record, the entire
Redevelopment Project is not yet complete. The following is a list of accomplishments:
Designed and developed Rollins Park, the Child Care Center,the Fire Station, City
Hall, the Library, and Pico Park. The Agency has also completed the design for a
new baseball field to be built on Agency-owned land.
Developed and implemented programs for neighborhood improvement,including the
Neighborhood Grant Program,the Commercial Improvement Program,wall-painting
projects, and neighborhood cleanup projects.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 3
Purchased and cleared property for the City's first dog park.
Completed the affordable senior villas, senior center, and Petta Park
- Sponsored and supported economic development programs, including business
training, the Chamber of Commerce, and new signage.
The following is a list of projects that are not yet complete:
- Barton Road infrastructure improvements
- Storm drain,and road improvements near Main and Michigan
- Reconstruction of Grand Terrace Road, west of I-215
- Construction of a new baseball field, the dog park, and other amenities
- Michigan Street improvements
- Affordable family housing
- Correction of drainage deficiencies throughout the City
- Continuing efforts to correct and prevent future deferred maintenance, for
commercial and residential areas, and infrastructure that may not yet be evident
To address the City's future needs and lack of funding, the Community Redevelopment
Agency (Agency) has taken a number of steps toward amending the Redevelopment Plan
_ (Plan). The basis of the Amendment recommendations is the Agency's$70 million revenue
limit will be reached in approximately two years, and funds no longer will be received for.
L capital projects (roads, facilities, and parks), economic and community enhancement
programs or housing projects and programs. The existing limitations in the Redevelopment
Plan, if not amended, would force the Agency to now shift its financial focus to repaying
debt service on outstanding bonds, rather than funding new and ongoing projects and
programs. Exacerbating the funding shortfall issue is the fact that the Agency cannot now
collect its maximum allowable revenue due to minimal outstanding debt, which is needed
to justify revenue collection.
Recommended actions include extending the length of time during which the Agency can
continue collecting revenue to meet the Agency's and City's goals. There will be no increase
in taxes,just a longer period of revenue collection, which would increase the total amount
collected over the entire life of the plan. Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan
would accomplish the following:
1. Increase the cumulative tax increment revenue limit in the Redevelopment Plan from
$70 million(net of payments made to certain taxing entities)to approximately$225
million(net of payments made to certain taxing entities)
2. Increase the limit on the amount of bonded debt that may be outstanding at any one
time in the redevelopment plan from$15 million to approximately$75 million(this
does not approve a bond issue)
3. Extend the effectiveness of the redevelopment plan and time limit to collect tax
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 4
increment revenue by the following time frames:
a. Original Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area("Original
Area")extend plan effectiveness from July 15,2017,to September 27,2022,
and time limit to collect tax increment from July 15, 2027,to September 27,
2032
b. Area added by the first amendment to the Grand Terrace Community _
Redevelopment Project Area("Added Area")extend plan effectiveness from
July 15, 2017 to July 15, 2024 and time limit to collect tax increment from
July 15, 2027 to July 15, 2034
4. Rescind the Agency's authority to commence eminent domain within the Project
Area, effective immediately following the effectiveness of the ordinance adopting
Amendment No. 6
5. Replace the description of land uses in the redevelopment plan with language that
directly refers to the City's General Plan,zoning ordinance,and other applicable land
use policies and standards, as they exist today or are hereafter amended; and
6. Amend and restate the redevelopment plan to incorporate the prior amendments into
a single document.
To date; the Redevelopment Agency has approved and circulated several documents for
public review, including the Draft Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan prepared in
connection with Amendment No. 6, the Preliminary Report, the Draft Amended Owner
Participation Rules for Property Owners, Owners of Businesses,and Business Tenants, and
the Report to City Council. The documents also have been provided to affected taxing
agencies.
In addition to posting and publishing public notices,the Agency is required by State Law to
notify individual parties that may be affected by the Amendment. Because the entire City
is within the Redevelopment Project Area, 5,320 notices were sent by mail to individual
addressed. As a result of the mailing,staff received ten requests for additional information.
Each caller indicated that he or she was not familiar with the Redevelopment Project and
were unsure as to why they would receive such a notice. No calls were received indicating
an objection to the Plan Amendment or Project.
As previously stated, further redevelopment is necessary to address the remaining blight
within the Project area, such as improvements to Michigan Street and construction of new
public facilities. Also, a lack of necessary office and commercial facilities in the Project
Area requires residents to travel outside the City to purchase needed goods and services. The
lack of needed businesses also has a negative effect on general fund sales tax revenues.
Vacant property in the southwestern portion of the Project Area remains undeveloped due
to inadequate public infrastructure and other physical conditions that hinder development.
The Agency may correct drainage deficiencies,for example,to render site more developable.
Also, deterioration over time has caused some buildings in the Project Area to be unsafe or
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 5
unfit for use,which must either be cleared or rehabilitated. The presence of a higher rate of
crime in certain portions of the project Area creates a burden on the rest of the community
by demanding a disproportionate share of police and code enforcement resources.
It is estimated that the Agency will reach the current tax increment limit of$70 million in
fiscal year 2010-13, and will have no ability to collect additional tax increment without an
rr amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. The estimated costs to complete the Project and
meet the goals of the original Redevelopment Plan, are estimated (at today's construction
costs) to be between $30 and $40 million. Because the Agency has already collected
approximately $62.4 million since 1980, the Agency may only collect approximately $7.6
million in tax increment revenues until fiscal years 2009-10 and 2012-13, leaving a
significant deficit. Amendment No. 6 would raise the existing tax increment limit to $225
million, allowing the Agency to collect tax increment revenues until fiscal year 2033-34.
Because it is difficult to forecast infrastructure needs and the taxable value of new
development over the next 14 years,the revenue limit is proposed high,and may or may not
be achieved entirely.
It is important to note that the City's current revenue sources are not adequate to maintain
a constant level of City-wide basic services much less fund the public infrastructure,
developmental remediation, revitalization or affordable housing programs in the Project
^ Area. Also, a portion of annual redevelopment revenues are currently used to assist with
funding the City's community enhancement and neighborhood improvement programs,
housing programs,economic development programs,and planning and public works projects
and programs. According to the Agency's fiscal year 2009-10 Statement of Indebtedness,
redevelopment revenues are contribute approximately$800,000 to costs that otherwise would
be funded by the General Fund. The costs are primarily for facility and infrastructure
improvements and staff time to implement these projects and programs.
The lack of redevelopment revenue would also have a critical impact on current City staffing
levels and the continuation of many City services. The most difficult period for the City
would be from 2012-13 when Agency revenue has surpassed its $70 million cap and funds
cease to be collected, through 2017 when the existing Plan would no longer be effective.
From 2012 to 2017, the Agency will still be required to meet its legal obligations, such as,
develop and monitor affordable housing projects and make debt payments, but without
revenue to do so.
The following summarizes the additional implications if Amendment No.6 is not approved:
The Agency is still obligated to meet the low and moderate income housing fund
targeting requirements as described in the Agency's current Implementation Plan.
The Agency would need to assign the responsibility for monitoring affordable
housing projects to the City.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 6
Bond obligations must be met by the Agency. The Agency would need to shift most
of its remaining funds to pay bond debt service and terminate nonhousing programs
immediately.
Even if the Agency stops receiving tax increment revenue, it would still be required
to complete administrative activities, which include an audit, annual reports, etc.
- Assets owned by the Agency may need to be liquidated or sold in order to terminate 3
any carry costs (now managed by staff).
She requested that Public Works Director Richard Shields address some of the current
conditions with the Public Infrastructure.
Building and Safety/Public Works Director Richard Shields, stated that with the opening of
the Grand Terrace High School in 2011 we are going to see a lot of additional traffic on.
Michigan Avenue and we all know that we need sidewalks, curb and gutter and we need to
underground the utilities in that area. Their goal is to start this project in the beginning of
this next fiscal year. In order to do that we have to have the design of the street prepared and
prepare the acquisitions for right of way. They have to complete the environmental review
process, which takes a very long time. They have to obtain right of way for widening and
fund the construction for the widening. All of this is very costly and we are going to need
redevelopment funds to accomplish these goals. He has three other projects that were
mentioned earlier. The City was designed in a grid system and everything comes from Blue
Mountain down to the basin towards the freeway. We have Pico Street, Van Buren Street
and DeBerry Street that are designed to basically carry a lot of the flood waters. We have 12
inch curb facings in this area to do that. In some areas we don't have any curbs or gutters
and some of the residents have designed their own curb and gutter to help mitigate some of
the water that may come over. Redevelopment funds in the future are going to be needed to
design the hydrology for picking up that storm water. We have to design the storm water
system once the hydrology is completed. We have to complete the environmental that goes
along with that as a State requirement and we have to fund construction improvements.
Along with those improvements will be a repaving of Pico;DeBerry and Van Buren and of
course we want to look at the possibility of upgrading all of the corner handicap ramps to
facilitate the removal of barriers per ADA. This is something that we need to have
redevelopment funds for and it is essential that we do. We need to widen the street and
install a traffic signal at Mt.Vernon Avenue and Grand Terrace Road heading north towards
Colton city limits. With the 1215 gap closure, after the Barton Road Bridge is constructed,
Caltrans and SANBAG is on line to do the Washington Bridge overpass if funds are
available through the Federal Government. Once that project is done we are going to have
a bottle neck at Grand Terrace Road and Mt.Vernon without having a signal and not having
a wide enough roadway coupled with the fact that we have the Riverside Canal that goes
through the side of that hill. This city is going to need redevelopment funds in order to
accomplish that goal. We need to install signals at the corner of Mt. Vernon Avenue and
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 7
Van Buren,Pico and Mt. Vernon and Main Street and Mt. Vernon. We all know that there
is 2500 graded pads in the County of Riverside not to mention all of the commercial property
that is going to spring up there as well. Those traffic flows are going to come through our
City and we need to be prepared for that. We are going to need redevelopment funds to
assist with building those traffic signals because development impact fees that we get from
the County will probably not be enough to complete the project. Redevelopment funds here
are extremely important. Staff is recommending approval of this Ordinance so that the
infrastructure improvements in our City pace the development that is coming.here and also
pace the development in the outlining areas of the County, Colton and other areas.
City Attorney John Harper, it is something that seems obvious to City people and Staff but
maybe not to the public. The City does not have the legal ability to leverage its money. The
City can not issue general obligations bonds, it is against the law. The only way a City can
issue debt is by going to the ballot but it requires the raising of taxes. The Redevelopment
Agency does not raise taxes and it has the ability to leverage that money.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, stated that notice of this hearing
was provided by the following actions: (1)publication of the notice of joint public hearing
in the San Bernardino Sun on March 29, April 5, April 12 and April 19,2010; (2) mailing
approximately 5,320 notices to all property owners,businesses and residents in the project
area via first class mail in the Project Areas that the Agency could identify; and(3)mailing
notices to all affected taxing entities via certified mail. She has provided proofs of those
mailings and publication and all that is required to the City Clerk's office for the record. She
stated that she received 10 phone calls. Everyone of the phone calls were requesting
additional information about exactly what the City was doing and were unaware that they
were in the redevelopment area. They also only received one phone call from the
Community College District and they were just clarifying that the amendment would not
change their pass through.
Mayor Ferre requested that the City Clerk summarize any written correspondence received
on the Amended Plan.
City Clerk Brenda Mesa, reported that she received 5 letters regarding the amendment and
that copies were provided to each of the Councilmembers. All letters were in favor of the
amendment.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz,requested some examples of"correct site deficiency to make
underutilized land desirable for development".
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, responded that the most
significant example that comes to mind in the City of Grand Terrace is the southwestern
portion of the City where you have looked at projects such as the Outdoor Adventures Center
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 8
and Grand Crossings. We are talking about 100 acres there that could be developed. Today
it is severely impacted by poor drainage and topography that would make it impossible in
terms of financial feasibility to develop and that is where a redevelopment agency could
come in. The developer would have to build roads for ingress and egress. The other thing
that they look at is there any contamination on the property small parcels that are so small
that they can not be develop even although they may be zoned commercial they are only 50
feet wide.
Sylvia Robles,23008 Orangewood Court,did a power point presentation,stating that we are
proposing $25 million in new debt, $17 million of that will be in interest payments. $1.7
million in administrative costs. There are no projects for youth, recreation, sports fields or
libraries. All costs are to support future development. The health and safety code requires
an explanation of why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the proj ect area can
not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the
legislative body's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. Why do
we need our public funds to do this. We have not proven that the entire city of Grand
Terrace is blighted. We have not proven that using property tax revenues to fund private
investment in commercial/retail development is beneficial to the City. To make the case that
investing in private enterprise will increase the City tax base is really not working. We are
down 11%in our revenues and real estate values are plunging. There is no lack of grocery
stores,banks or retail establishments, in fact we have two failed grocery stores in a one mile
radius, a former AlbertsonsNons, we have had bank failures but yet we have two banks.
Crime is one of the lowest in the County and the privately funded Walgreens and Fresh n
Easy have been put on hold due to the lack of consumer demand. Pursuant to Health and
Safety Code the burden has to be proven that it can not reasonably be expected to be reversed
by private and/or governmental action without redevelopment. The City has to provide
alternative funding that could be used in lieu of tax increment financing. We built the City
Hall,the parks,and the Child Care Center. Her concern is that why are we doing properties
that should be done by private capital. This is again a very little known part of government
of debt. This is a global policy issue,she has no problem with the things that directly benefit
the residents. It is not the City's fault that we have in a State with this kind of local fiscal
relationship. It is something that we have to globally address and her recommendation would
be to ask the State for some of the RDA money to be put back into our coughers. That way
we can do bonds and we can vote for them directly. We can issue general obligation bonds
but we must vote on them. When a RDA does this citizens do not have a chance to
determine where that money goes.
Cynthia Bidngy, 12219 Pascal, discussed elements of blight. The Health and Safety Code
describes physical conditions that cause blight which are buildings in which it is unsafe or
unhealthy for persons to live or work. Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the
viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. The report photographs private properties that the
owners could fix under code enforcement, this does need to be paid for by RDA via tax
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 9
payers money. In this economy with the current vacancy level and people losing their jobs
we will not pay back$44 million in her lifetime or her children's lifetime. Taxpayers money
should be spent on projects that benefit its citizens and not developers, bond agents, and
attorneys. Let the people vote. City Council Members making decisions as the
Redevelopment Agency is a conflict of interest because the RDA depends on using taxpayer
money without tax payers vote regarding private development. Amendment No. 6 should
v ' be put on the ballot for November in order to avoid a conflict. A complete accountability
should be included. More elements of blight include:Adjacent or nearby incompatible land
uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. The
existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple ownership and whose physical development
has been impaired by their irregular shapes and inadequate sizes,given present planning and
zoning standards and present market conditions. This subdivision describes economic
conditions that cause blight: Depreciated or stagnant property values. Impaired property
values due in significant part, to hazardous waste on property. Is it governments job to be
a real estate agent for the private developer? Elements of blight continued:Abnormally high
business vacancies,abnormally low lease rates or an abnormally high number of abandoned
buildings. A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in
neighborhoods including grocery stores,drug stores,and banks and other lending institutions
all of which we have. Serious residential overcrowding which has resulted in significant
public health or safety problems. An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented
businesses that has resulted in significant public health,safety,or welfare problems. A high
crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. We don't have
over crowded bars or liquor stores,but the City approved an adult-oriented tattoo parlor. We
do have Space for lease at the town center, a closed out of business Hollywood Video
Center, a stalled Walgreens/Fresh n Easy site that is privately funded, an empty Starbucks
in Grand Terrace,Vacant office space in Grand Terrace,failed Albertsons in Cooley Ranch,
failed Vons in Cooley Ranch, failed pharmacy in Cooley Ranch, failed Kmart, $12 million
RDA funds in Cooley Ranch. Grand Terrace empty medical office space and empty store
fronts in Grand Terrace Center. You may resolve your RDA problem but you will create
more blight because you can't fill all of this space that you want to build.
Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, feels that the property taxes generated in Grand Terrace
should be spent in Grand Terrace not in Needles or Chino or some other part of the County
therefor he supports Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan.
JoArm Johnson, 12723 Mt.Vernon Avenue,this is a huge project and she certainly feels that
Grand Terrace would be significantly better off to approve the Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan.
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, stated that it is important to note at this time that
developer impact fees that were established in order to accommodate future growth capital
projects,which are needed,have been done wrong for many years and everyone did not pay
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 10
their fair share. It appears that these fees were never waived by the City Council and it is a
violation of the Municipal Code if they are not paid. This should mean that these fees,which
amount to a large amount of revenue are still owed regardless of how they were done. This
could help eliminate some major problems that we have right now in our City. These fees
are not paid by the RDA and help fund general government facilities, public meeting
facilities, storm drainage facilities,traffic signal improvements, street improvements, park
lands and open space. Collect that money instead of getting more. It is a fact that RDA has
created blight in designated project areas in the City of Grand Terrace such as the Town
Center,Barton Road and Grand Crossings. Preventing property owners from doing anything
with their property for years. Property in any designated project areas should never have
been sold to any developer or any developer given unlimited amounts of time until they can
prove that they can follow through and adequately. Adequate access should never be your
last consideration,which it often is. Wasting huge amounts of time and money that should
have been used to process an honest accurate General Plan. Do you realize that you just
certified a plan that doesn't consider the high school. She doesn't believe that it is a slight
error. To expect that she is going to trust you to mitigate all of the problems that you have
caused when the law requires that you completely screen from not only residents but the
public. Things like the trucking business on Michigan,you have illegal use on land and you
are passing it to agencies telling them that this land is allowed for this and you are hurting
us terribly. Essco is not on the map, a tatto parlor in the middle of town, things are out of
control and because you were so negligent in the way you've processed the General Plan now
you say now forget it we don't care if it is accurate just throw a few million dollars there.
You have had the chance to correct this stuff and to collect fees, which our City has not
collected for years, and process paper work properly. She does not believe for one minute
that with the negligence about the high school that you won't run a road right through her
property to make up for your negligence. She is so insulted and offended by the lack of
accurate information that is presented constantly at these meetings.
B.J.Ghuman,23186 Glendora Drive,feels that the City should progress and that the Council
should adopt the Redevelopment Amendment.
Charles Hornsby,22656 Brentwood Street,stated that the proposal that is before the Council
tonight is to set yourself up so that you can borrow more money from a State that doesn't
have it to lend. If you think that is a good idea,by all means go ahead. If you do so,you are
using bad judgement and at the very least you should forfeit the right to complain about the
fiscal irresponsibility that Sacramento shows. Cities, towns and communities state-wide
need to come to grips with the fact with whatever money you spend in the name of
redevelopment only serves to increase California's debt load and makes it more expensive
for the State to borrow, which it does on a regular basis. This is a simple fact of life in our
State and we are inching ever closer to being at junk bond level. Look at what happened in
Greece, they are bankrupt. Don't think for a minute that it can't happen here. Perhaps the
more important issue, that just came up tonight, is the built in conflict of interest that is
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 11
present in our town. This is not a reflection on current City Staff but Council on a regular
basis takes advice if not direction from the Redevelopment Agency and very much from the
City Manager. The simple fact of the matter is, much of the City Manager's salary comes
from redevelopment money. He doesn't know you can expect an unbiased opinion from a
City Manager on a proposed redevelopment project when a great deal of the City Manager's
salary comes from redevelopment money itself. Joyce showed you some pictures. Those
were nothing more than pictures of life in a small town. Mr.Harper makes a good point,the
City can't generate funds very easily but what he doesn't say is those funds still have to come
from somewhere. There is only so much money in the State. If the City doesn't generate the
funds the State has to generate the funds. It's not an honest statement that he made, it's just
one side of it. He has lived here for 18 years now and he does not see that the City is any
better or any He
really than it was when'he moved here. A lot of effort has gone into
redevelopment and he doesn't see any pay-off. It's still a nice city to live in just like it was
before.
Warne Whipple, 12090 Rosedale Avenue, stated that the Redevelopment Agency is not a
perfect thing, we are human and we make mistakes but he feels that all in all if you go out
into other cities and you tell them where you live they will say what a nice City Grand
Terrace is. We are a gem amongst all cities and he feels that we should keep moving in this
direction and continue with the Redevelopment Agency.
S
Jeffrey McConnell,21758 Walnut Avenue,appreciates the explanation of the Amendment.
He stated that the Redevelopment money comes from taxes that the property owners in town
already pay. If we don't use it, we lose it. Let's use it. If we don't use it San Bernardino
County will use it somewhere where we would never see it. If we don't have the money here
for aging infrastructure when the time comes and we need it then we can pass a bond but we
can't pass a bond to raise money for every two years and then there is no guarantee that it
will pass. The economic times are still hard they are not going to vote to raise taxes, they
don't have the money. He says to keep the redevelopment money here. The empty buildings
is very typical of a down economy. He saw it when he first came here in 2000. Part of the
problem is that we are geographically boxed in by La Loma Hills,the terrace as well as blue
mountain. What we need is to develop the 123 acres for a large retail or other business that
brings in money that draws from a very large demographic area. If it requires the
redevelopment agency money to help us to do that then it accomplishes that Grand Terrace
can draw from that and remain Grand Terrace. I believe most of us do not want to be County
again. As Mr. Hornsby says, Greece is going bankrupt, he agrees he does not want Grand
Terrace to go bankrupt. If we don't have the RDA money the chances of us going bankrupt
is high. What is the RDA payoff for Grand Terrace,Grand Terrace is a nice place to live and
it still is because we have been utilizing redevelopment money to make Grand Terrace a
beautiful place to live.
Bobbie Forbes, 11850 Burns Avenue, stated that she lives on one of the blighted streets in
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 12
the town. She does not want sidewalks in front of her home. She has not thought it out like
some of the other speakers tonight. She stated that she sells real estate in Grand Terrace and
everyone wants to live here. We need to keep our money in town and spend our money in
our community and not let anyone else get it. We have things that need to be addressed,
whether they be in your neighborhood or mine. The house that Joyce showed a picture of
on Burns Avenue is an empty house. It is a house that was built in a walnut grove in the
early 1900's. It belongs to someone that lives up on Miriam Way. It is just sitting there.
They have tried to sell it, unfortunately he turned down$335,000.00 on the property when
the market was really high and probably couldn't get$100,000.00 now. It does look bad but
it is just going to sit there for long time until someone comes in or develops that property.
Her home is one of the newer homes in her neighborhood. She has a field across from her
that she has been maintaining for twelve years so she doesn't have to go to the vet and pay
$500.00 fox tail bill for one of her cats or dogs. She can't wait for the County or City to take
care of it, it's not worth it for her. It's an area that is big lots and it's hard to keep up
especially in the spring and right now it looks blighted. She loves where she lives, please
don't put in street lights or sidewalks but please fix the road and Grand Terrace Road. Please
keep our money here and please spend it in our community and don't let them take it.
Mayor Ferrd closed the public hearing and returned the discussion to the Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia,stated that so much has been presented here this evening and that she _
appreciates all of the comments and letters. At this point she is still trying to process
everything that she just heard. Feels that there is one group of people that want to keep the
City going in the same direction and there is another group that has concerns about taking
on more than we can handle. It comes down to looking at the future and how we see the
City. She stated that economic development is something that you do continually. Some of
the things that are going on in the City is due to the economy and out of our control. She
questioned as we are addressing the blighted areas and created new things how are we going
to ensure we maintain the integrity of a lot of these vacancies and filling what our existing
stock is?
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,responded that as we all know a
lot of tenants will have a tendency to move to the nicer newer facility and that is the reason
that she has been such a proponent of the rehab programs commercial and residential. We
could probably name a couple of centers that are really in need of rehab,which goes directly
back to keeping them occupied. No one starting a new business wants to be in a run down
center and that is where our programs can help in making sure that those stay filled.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia,stated that when people think of redevelopment it's not just creating
new it's maintaining and taking care of what we have. The important thing for her as we
move forward is that the Redevelopment Plan will look at the City as a whole and that there
will be a focus on maintaining our City integrity as a quality place to live. She stated that she
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 13
feels that if you let infrastructure go it will cost ten times more when you have to fix it so she
feels that it is important to maintain it.
Councilmember Walt Stanckiewitz, stated that all of the Councilmembers received a
thorough letter from Darcy McNaboe that laid out her impression of where we are and where
- t
we are going with redevelopment. As he read through it he found himself agreeing with her.
She touched on some things that he wanted to share. The first thing she talked about was
local elected officials can be held accountable to local constituents more effectively then
elected officials with no ties to the community. If he messes up,he is out. The people make
that decision. If someone in the County messes up you are a few thousand votes out of
hundreds of thousands of votes. Having the.Redevelopment money in Grand Terrace and
Council making the decisions, the Council will be accountable for it. Mistakes have been
made in the past and money may have been wasted but hopefully we have learned and
hopefully we are going to go forward and we are going to do the right things. He would like
to see the community involved more. He is glad there has been public participation this
evening. As the Redevelopment Agency goes forward, if they approve it, that public
participation needs to continue. They need to hear from everyone what is important to them.
How much benefit a neighborhood can realize from the Redevelopment Plan is focused on
the specific needs of that neighborhood. Who better can tell what they want than the people
that live there. Bonds are taking on debt but it is long term debt that is not credit card
interest rate type debt and it's not necessarily coming from the State but if we don't take on
debt then we can't take care of business and he is not talking about taking care of commercial
business. He is talking about taking care of business infrastructure and drainage. He'has
seen the rivers coming off of blue mountain and something needs to be done and we are not
going to be able to do that without redevelopment. If we don't have this we will be
competing with larger cities for the money that we chose not to go get. He stated that every
dollar of redevelopment agency spending generates 13 dollars of economic activity,jobs and
tax revenue. You take the whole big picture and there is benefit to this. Yes there is a cost
and yes we are going to incur debt but if you take the picture,in the end we should come out
ahead. He does not want to revert to a piece of unincorporated San Bernardino County and
that is his fear if we do not approve this.
Mayor Maryetta Ferrd, believes that it was a miracle that the City of Grand Terrace became
a City 30 plus years ago. She is aware that this City could not have remained a City without
the Redevelopment Agency and at this point if we do not continue with the Redevelopment
Agency she fears greatly for the success of this City in the future. She feels that this is a very
important point in the life of the City of Grand Terrace and she believes that it rests on the
Redevelopment Agency.
Mayor Ferrd requested that the City Attorney advised the Council on how to proceed based on the
comments received.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 27,2010
Page 14
City Attorney Harper indicated that the Public Hearing is Closed and that the Council can proceed
if there is a motion.
CC-2010-37 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT), to approve a Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental
Impact Report Prepared for Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the '
Revised Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City-Wide.
CC-2010-38 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, SECOND BY MAYOR
FERRE, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
approve the first reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No. 6 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area.
Chairman Ferre adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 9:40 p.m.,until the
next CRA/City Council Meeting that is scheduled to be held on Tuesday,May 11,2010 at 6:00 p.m.
SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptionlAccount Amount
65198 4/22/2010 001206 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION Mar/April 2010 MARCH/APRIL VISA PURCHASES
10-110-210-000-000 Get well flowers-Miller 54.38
10-120-270-000-000 Conferences/Meetings 75.00
10-180-272-000-000 Dump Truck Parts 117.72
10-440-210-000-000 Small Furniture 108.74
10-190-246-000-000 Postage Ink Cartridge 94.38
10-440-228-000-000 Preschool Supplies 150.78
10-440-230-000-000 C. Care-Advertising 89.00
10-440-246-000-000 C. Care-Equipment Maintenance 119.90
10-805-220-000-000 Sr. Ctr. TV/Wall Mount 833.46
32-600-305-000-000 Wall Painting Project 41.90
23-200-14-00 C. Care Snow Day Fundraiser 178.89
Total: 1,864.15
65199 4/22/2010 006285 RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER CO Feb/Mar 2010 FEB/MAR USAGE AND FEES
34-700-709-000-000 9.80
34-700-710-000-000 9.80
34-700-767-000-000 9.80
26-600-239-000-000 61.33
26-601-239-000-000 59.48
32-600-214-000-000 24.81
32-600-307-000-000 19.60
10-190-238-000-000 258.73
10-440-238-000-000 102.85
10-450-238-000-000 1,840.41
10-805-238-000-000 587.53
Total: 2,984.14
65200 4/26/2010 010998 AETNA AARP PLANS 4710331005 MAY HEALTH INS.-B. CORTES
10-110-142-000-000 368.06
10-110-120-000-000 172.94
Total: 541.00
65201 4/26/2010 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE 4-23 to 5-22-10 SR CTR INTERNET SERVICE APR/MAY
10-805-238-000-000 117.82
Page: 1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM N®.3R
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65201 4/26/2010 011110 TIME WARNER CABLE (Continued) Total: 117.82
65202 4/26/2010 011119 ALLIED OFFICE EQUIP/SUPPLIES O42610 50%DEPOSIT FOR SR CTR CHAIRS
10-805-219-000-000 3,965.10
Total: 3,965.10
65203 4/27/2010 006778 STAPLES 8014932112 OFFICE SUPPLIES
10-190-212-000-000 173.95
10-140-210-000-000 35.31
Total: 209.26
65204 4/27/2010 006778 STAPLES 801509*6951 Copy Paper
10-190-212-000-000 173.95
Total: 173.95
65205 4/27/2010 010258 GMAC PAYMENT PROCESSING CENTER May 024-9103-15E LEASE GMAC TAHOE VIN#1GNFC130X7R248904
34-800-273-000-000 5%21
Total: 559.21
65206 4/28/2010 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PRend 04/16/201( Contributions for PRend 4-16-10
10-022-62-00 18,555.64
Total: 18,555.64
65207 4/28/2010 010996 CA PUB EMPLOYEES' RET. SYSTEM H2010051493000 MAY EMPLOYEE/DEPENDENT HEALTH INSURANCE
,l
Page: 2
1
\ F
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65207 4/28/2010 010996 CA PUB EMPLOYEES'RET. SYSTEM (Continued)
10-022-61-00 7,114.78
10-190-265-000-000 72.19
10-120-142-000-000 349.65
10-125-142-000-000 552.10
10-140-142-000-000 828.15
10-172-142-000-000 184.04
10-175-142-000-000 147.22
10-180-142-000-000 791.34
10-370-142-000-000 625.70
10-380-142-000-000 368.06
10-440-142-000-000 2,313.36
10-450-142-000-000 276.05
16-175-142-000-000 736.10
21-572-142-000-000 349.66
32-200-142-000-000 533.69
32-370-142-000-000 404.87
34-400-142-000-000 515.25
Total: 16,162.21
65208 4/28/2010 006459 S.B. COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD 04282010 Filing fee-NOD for Amendment 6 to Redev
10-370-250-000-000 50.00
Total: 50.00
65209 5/11/2010 007987 XEROX CORPORATION 047723586 CC55 COPIER LEASE
10-190-700-000-000 371.33
047723587 CC265 COPIER LEASE
10-190-700-000-000 294.34
Total: 665.67
65210 5/11/2010 007925 WILSON, DOUG April 2010 April PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
March 2010 March PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total: 100.00
65211 5/11/2010 007880 WEST GROUP 820448737 Mar/Apr CA Code Update
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice DescriptionlAccount Amount
65211 5/11/2010 007880 WEST GROUP (Continued)
10-125-250-000-000 432.29
Total: 432.29
65212 5/11/2010 001038 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA 0863958888 Apr/May Cell Service and Equip Charge
34-400-235-000-000 352.41
Total: 352.41
65213 5/11/2010 010693 UNITED WAY 4/2/10-4/16/10 April Employee Deductions
10-022-65-00 139.00
Total : 139.00
65214 5/11/2010 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. 0042224956 FOOD&SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 601.08
0042811083 FOOD&SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 463.12
Total: 1,064.20
65215 5/11/2010 006778 STAPLES 8015275695 EOC/CERT Supplies
10-808-708-000-000 35.85
8015329926 Copy Paper
10-190-212-000-000 173.95
8015329926a Kitchen Supplies
10-190-220-000-000 40.73
Total: 250.53
65216 5/11/2010 006720 SO.CA.EDISON COMPANY April 2010 April Energy Used
16-510-238-000-000 674.21
10-440-238-000-000 555.94
10-172-238-000-000 41.31
15-500-601-000-000 22.50
34-400-238-000-000 90.89
10-450-238-000-000 787.66
10-175-238-000-000 33.05
10-190-238-000-000 2,262.11
Total: 4,467.67
Page: 4
11
vchlist Voucher List Page: 5
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65217 5/11/2010 007005 SO CAL LOCKSMITH 11558 Keys
10-180-246-000-000 9.79
Total: 9.79
65218 5/11/2010 006435 SAN BERNARDINO, CITY OF 4940 Feb Animal Housing Service Fee
10-190-256-000-000 2,012.00
4983 MAR ANIMAL HOUSING SERVICE FEE
10-190-256-000-000 2,012.00
Total: 4,024.00
65219 5/11/2010 005586 PETTY CASH 05032010 Replenish C. Care Petty Cash
10-440-220-000-000 23.46
10-440-221-000-000 21.44
10-440-223-000-000 84.47
10-440-228-000-000 52.46
23-200-14-00 38.40
Total: 220.23
65220 5/11/2010 005400 OFFICE DEPOT 516787360001 Office Supplies
21-572-210-000-000 160.67
517341910001 Toner/Print Cartridge
10-140-210-000-000 113.35
10-190-212-000-000 51.37
Total: 325.39
65221 5/11/2010 010097 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 410575025-092 Mar/Apr Cell Phone Service
10-180-240-000-000 378.91
10-440-235-000-000 50.09
Total: 429.00
65222 5/11/2010 010546 MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS 387767 May Phone Service/Lines
10-440-235-000-000 305.44
10-805-235-000-000 69.85
10-450-235-000-000 66.18
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65222 5/11/2010 010546 MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS (Continued)
387798 May Phone Service/Lines
10-190-235-000-000 1,014.40
10-380-235-000-000 200.00
10-808-235-000-000 63.53
Total: 1,719.40
65223 5/11/2010 010611 MCNABOE, DARCY April 2010 April PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
March 2010 March PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total: 100.00
65224 5/11/2010 004588 MARTIN&CHAPMAN CO. 210166 NOV 2010 ELECTION SUPPLIES
10-125-210-000-000 132.06
Total: 132.06
65225 5/11/2010 010210 LILBURN CORPORATION 10-0235 Jan/Feb Canal Housing Inital Study
23-302-68-10 1,837.50
Total: 1,837.50
65226 5/11/2010 004350 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES, INLAND EM 042610 MAY 20, 2010 DINNER
10-110-270-000-000 35.00
10-120-270-000-000 35.00
Total: 70.00
65227 5/11/2010 004320 LAWNMOWER CENTER 5440 MOWER/BLOWER REPAIRS
10-450-246-000-000 60.43
5508 MOWER/BLOWER REPAIRS
10-450-246-000-000 16.28
Total: 76.71
65228 5/11/2010 003490 INMARK/VICTOR 114062 Name Badge-Reinarz
10-185-210-000-000 18.12
Total: 18.12
65229 5/11/2010 011076 HOMAYOON SHAMOLIAN, DBA CONTINENTA 23790 22400 Barton Rd-New Signage
32-600-304-000-000 6,300.00
Page: 6
J
vchlist Voucher List Page: 7
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65229 5/11/2010 011076 HOMAYOON SHAMOLIAN, DBA CONTINENTA(Continued) Total: 6,300.00
65230 5/11/2010 010752 GST INC. JO1315533 Toner for Printer
10-370-210-000-000 164.22
Tota 1: 164.22
65231 5/11/2010 010164 GREAT-WEST PR END 4/16/10 Contributions for PR end 4/16/10
10-022-63-00 5,970.59
10-022-64-00 1,574.20
Total: 7,544.79
65232 5/11/2010 011121 GONZALES, CLAUDIA 041410 Shelter Refund
10-450-01 40.00
Total: 40.00
65233 5/11/2010 002901 G.T. AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5988-AD April Contribution
32-370-213-000-000 870.00
Total: 870.00
65234 5/11/2010 002740 FRUIT GROWERS SUPPLY 90493856 Maintenance Supplies
10-180-245-000-000 17.01
90516813 Weed Control
10-180-245-000-000 294.89
90520437 Senior Center Maintenance
10-805-245-000-000 3.97
90520849 Maintenance Supplies
10-180-245-000-000 50.40
10-805-245-000-000 6.48
90521635 Senior Center Maintenance
10-805-245-000-000 20.79
Total: 393.54
65235 5/11/2010 002721 FRITTS FORD FLEET CENTER Q73679 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
10-180-272-000-000 47.65
Q73902 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
10-180-272-000-000 196.45
Tota 1: 244.10
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65236 5/11/2010 011106 FRACO ENTERPRISES INC 300.3 BASEBALL FIELD PROJ DESIGN/ENGINEERING
32-600-312-000-000 14,900.25
Total: 14,900.25
65237 5/11/2010 002082 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLIES D12104660101 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 461.90
10-440-219-000-000 141.04
Total: 602.94
65238 5/11/2010 001942 DATA TICKET INC. 31322 MARCH PARKING CITE PROCESSING SERVICES
10-140-255-000-000 100.00
Total: 100.00
65239 5/11/2010 010711 DANKA FINANCIAL SERVICES 71967582 TOSHIBA COPIER LEASE E-STUDIO 310
10-172-246-000-000 63.83
10-175-246-000-000 31.91
34-400-246-000-000 63.83
Total: 159.57
65240 5/11/2010 001930 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION B1826463 Public Hearing Notice
32-200-250-000-000 1,232.00
B1830958 LEGAL ADVERTISING
10-125-230-000-000 462.00
B1830959 LEGAL ADVERTISING
10-125-230-000-000 242.00
B1840065 LEGAL ADVERTISING
10-125-230-000-000 400.40
Total: 2,336.40
65241 5/11/2010 010086 COMSTOCK, TOM April 2010 April PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
March 2010 March PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total: 100.00
65242 5/11/2010 010866 CIVIC PLUS 79804 WEBSITE MAINT FEE
10-125-250-000-000 633.25
Page: 8
\ L
y I
vchlist Voucher List Page: 9
05/04/2010 4:13:23PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: ofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
65242 5/11/2010 010866 CIVIC PLUS (Continued) Total: 633.25
65243 5/11/2010 001840 CITY OF COLTON 000986 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
10-190-256-000-000 3,629.00
Total: 3,629.00
65244 5/11/2010 001740 CDW GOVERNMENT INC RCR6515 Item#1171146
10-808-701-000-000 58.13
Total: 58.13
65245 5/11/2010 001666 CA. MUNICIPAL TREASURERS ASSOC 1237980 2010 Membership-Simon
10-140-270-000-000 55.00
10-140-265-000-000 100.00
Total: 155.00
65246 5/11/2010 011085 BROADVIEW SECURITY 4th Qtr 120623891 4th Qtr Sr. Cttr Monitoring
10-805-245-000-000 101.18
Total: 101.18
65247 5/11/2010 011082 BAILES, ROBERT April 2010 April PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
March 2010 March PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Tota I: 100.00
65248 5/11/2010 001213 AT&T Apr 091031-1947�April Equipment/Internet Service
10-190-235-000-000 127.48
Apr 9098247013 7 Apr/May C. Care DSL Service
10-440-235-000-000 79.78
Tota 1: 207.26
65249 5/11/2010 001040 ADDINGTON, MATTHEW April 2010 April PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
March 2010 March PL Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Tota 1: 100.00
52 Vouchers for bank code: ofa Bank total: 100,356.08
Page: 9
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the afore-listed checks for payment of City and
Community Redevelopment Agency liabilities have been audited by me and are necessary and
appropriate for the operation of City and Agency.
Bernie Simon, Finance Director
City of Grand Terrace
Warrant Register Index
FD No. Fund Name Dept No. Department Name General Account Numbers
10 GENERAL FUND 110 CITY COUNCIL 110 SALARIES/WAGES
11 Street Fund 120 CITY MANAGER 139 EMPLOYEES'BENEFIT PLAN
12 Storm Drain Fund 125 CITY CLERK 140 RETIREMENT
13 Park Fund 140 FINANCE 142 HEALTH/LIFE INSURANCE
14 AB 3229 COPS Fund 160 CITY ATTORNEY 143 WORKERS'COMPENSATION
15 Air Quality Improvement Fund 172 BUILDING&SAFETY 138/141 MEDICARE/SUI
16 Gas Tax Fund 175 PUBLIC WORKS 210 OFFICE EXPENSE
17 Traffic Safety Fund/TDA Fund 180 COMMUNITY SERVICES 218-219 NON-CAPITAL FURN/SMALL TOOLS
19 Facilities Development Fund 185 RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM 220 SPECIAL DEPARTMENTAL EXP
20 Measure I Fund 190 GENERAL GOVERNMENT(NON-DEPT) 230 ADVERTISING
21 Waste Water Disposal Fund 370 COMMUNITY&ECONOMIC DEV 235 COMMUNICATIONS
26 LSCPG/LGHTG Assessment Dist 380 MGT INFORMATION SYSTEMS 238-239 UTILITIES
44 Bike Lane Capital Fund 410 LAW ENFORCEMENT 240-242 RENTS&LEASES
46 Street Improvement Projects 430 RECREATION SERVICES 245-246 MAINT BLDG GRNDS EQUIPMNT
47 Barton Rd. Bridge Project 440 CHILD CARE 250-251 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
32 CRA-CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 450 PARKS MAINTENANCE 255-256 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
33 CRA-DEBT SERVICE FUND 631 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE 260 INSURANCE&SURETY BONDS
34 CRA-LOW&MOD HOUSING 801 PLANNING COMMISSION 265 MEMBERSHIPS&DUES
802 CRIME PREVENTION UNIT 268 TRAINING
804 HISTORICAL&CULTURAL COMM. 270 TRAVEUCONFERENCES/MTGS
805 SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM 272 FUEL&VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
807 PARKS&REC COMMITTEE 570 WASTEWATER TREATMENT
808 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PROG. . 33-300 DEBT SERVICE
7XX FACILITIES IMPRV(NO CIP)
700 COMPUTER-RELATED
701 VEHICLES& EQUIPMENT
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING -APRIL 27, 2010
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council
Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on April
27, 2010 at 6:00 p.m.
�- PRESENT: Maryetta Ferre, Mayor
Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tern
Walt Stanckiewitz, Councilmember
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Bernard Simon, Finance Director
Joyce Powers, Community& Economic Development Director
Richard Shields, Building& Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Sgt. Espinoza, San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department
John Salvate, San Bernardino County Fire Department
ABSENT: Bea Cortes, Councilmember
l
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6:00 P.M.
The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Mayor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia,
followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Walt Stanckiewitz.
ITEMS TO ADD/DELETE -None
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Chamber of Commerce Business of the Month
Sally McGuire,President,Chamber of Commerce,presented Emeritus at Grand Terrace with
the Chamber of Commerce Business of the Month Award for April, 2010.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-2010-32 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT), to approve the following Consent Calendar Items:
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3C
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 2
3A. Approve Check Register Dated 04-27-2010
313. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3C. Approval of 04-13-2010 Minutes
3D. Emergency Operations Committee Minutes of February 2, 2010 and March
2, 2010
3E. Crime Prevention Committee Minutes of January 11, 2010 and March 8,
2010
PUBLIC COMMENT
Denis Kidd,22874 Pico Street,reported that the Environmental Impact Report for the Perris
Valley Line is on display at the Highgrove Public Library and does not include a Highgrove
Metrolink Station in the plan. He indicated that anyone that would like to comment can send
an e-mail to higharovenews@roadrunner.com or call him at 951-683-4994.
Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, he is sure that there are a lot of people around
town, like him, that are wondering about the eye sore on the corner of Barton and Mt.
Vernon. Obviously it is beyond the City's control as far as whether it is actually going to go
through or not. The time has long come and gone when something needs to be done. If the
project is going to move forward then people need to know when that is going to happen and
if it's not going to happen for some time then the fence needs to be torn down and remove
the ugly sandbags and gravel and plant some grass.
Elsa Aguilar, 1088 Stevenson Street, Colton, invited everyone to their Honorary Service
Award Dinner. It is going to be held on May 26, 2010 at Lincoln Elementary School. All
proceeds go towards scholarships. She reported that pink slips have been given to teachers
and 5 furlough days have been proposed reducing instructional days. A meeting will be held
on the 29`h of April at 6:00 p.m. in the Ace Building. She also would like to bring up Child
Abduction Awareness in the schools.
Randall Ceniceros, 15862 Falcon Court, Fontana, stated that he currently serves as the
Treasurer of the Agua Mansa PTA Council. He stated that as a parent of 4 children with 2
being gate children who are in elementary and middle school. He is very concerned with
what is going on within the Colton Joint Unified School District. It was proposed by the
Board that they lay off 141 teachers but that number has risen to 160. They are also moving
forward with the proposal to furlough 5 days, which is reducing the instructional days. He
feels that this will hurt the kids and deny his child with quality education. One of the other
proposals was the reduction of gate funding by 90%. He feels that this is very alarming
because these are the kids who graduate and go on to higher education. These are our future
leaders. He recently learned that the District plans on opening the new Grand Terrace High
School without bleachers,concession building and a swimming pool,these are all items that
were on the architectural drawing when the proposal was made. He feels that it is important
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 3
for the City of Grand Terrace and City Council to be aware of what is going on within our
schools.
Ci , Managery M. Adams, stated that staff will bring back information at a later date
in response to the questions raised regarding the property at the corner of Barton Road and
Mt. Vernon.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, agreed with Mr. Hornsby regarding the corner of Mt. Vernon and
Barton Road. She feels that student safety is very important and she would like staff to look
into what school related programs are available through the Sheriff's Department and also
some type of program for children and their parents that could be done in the evening hours.
She thanked JoAnn Johnson for always being an inspiration to the City. She commended the
Chamber of Commerce for all that they are doing.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, reminded everyone that Market Night will be held on
Monday, May 3, 2010. He urged everyone to come out and support the businesses. He
reported that the 26`h Annual Art Show will be held on Sunday, May 2, 2010 from 1:00 to
4:00 p.m. He stated that he has been looking at the Crime Stats and it appears that we are
up about 50%.
Sat. Espinoza, responded that there was a rise in vehicle burglaries which was addressed.
Since that issue was addressed there have been much less. He stated that the actual crime
rate for 2009 was down from 2008 overall.
Mayor Ferrd, stated that the Art Show is a very worthwhile event to attend and that the
Historical and Cultural Activities Committee do a great job. The artists are all local. She
encouraged everyone to stop by and enjoy. She thanked the Community and Economic
Development Director for all of the work she has done on the reader boards and signs and
feels that they are a great asset.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6A. General Plan Update - Certification of the Final Program EIR
Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for
the Grand Terrace General Plan Update.
Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update Applicable City-Wide
Mayor Ferrel opened the Public Hearing.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 4
Sandra Molina, Senior Planner,reported that there have been a number of Workshops held
by the Planning Commission and also by the City Council to prepare this General Plan. The
draft General Plan has been prepared in accordance with Section 65300 et. Seq of the
California Government Code, which requires all cities and counties to adopt a
comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the city or county.
State law requires that the General Plan be comprised of seven mandated elements:land use,
circulation,housing,conservation,Open Space and Conservation(combined as one element),
Public Health and Safety,Noise, and Housing Elements,and two optional Elements:Public
Services and Sustainable Development. The Draft General Plan also contains an
Introduction chapter and Appendix A,which is a compilation of General Plan goals,policies,
and actions. She went over each element and why they are required and what they are
intended for and the goals and policies for implementation. She stated that all legal
requirements were met with regards to public notices and mailings. She recommended that
the City Council conduct the Public Hearing and adopt the Resolution certifying the Final
EIR prepared for the Project and Adopt the Resolution adopting the Grand Terrace General
Plan Update.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, stated that in Open Space and Conservation it is stated that
it clarifies that BMP's should incorporate low impact development principles and questioned
what low impact development principles are.
Building and Safety/Public Works Director Richard Shields,responded that BMP's are the
best management practices that are utilized through the permit from the County which they
are calling the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations System and we are the co-
permitees. Any construction site has to comply with certain management practices to
conduct their construction and local staff is suppose to make sure that they follow through
with those commitments. Staff does that and soon that requirement is going to increase even
greater with new requirements from the State of California.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if this will cause development to be even more
expensive.
Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields, responded in the affirmative. It's a
mandate and it takes a lot more effort from City Staff to ensure that these requirements are
met. There are provisions that are set-forth for the local jurisdictions to try and collect fees
for that. Most jurisdictions have not been able to do that. It's a tough requirement and we
have been doing it for many years and each year it gets a little bit tougher.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if we are sending a formal letter in regards to the
response from the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection informing them that they were
outside of the 60 day window and therefor their comments were not taken into consideration.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 5
Senior Planner Molina,responded that she will send a letter indicating that we will consider
their recommendations when the Safety Element is amended again.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz,stated that the only other issue he has is the land use map that
they pulled from the General Plan but left in the EIR. He expressed his discomfort with
pulling the map from the General Plan but leaving it in the EIR with a small comment that
} the consultant says it will have no impact.
Senior Planner Molina, responded that the map was used to establish a baseline of existing
traffic volumes. Traffic that is generated within the City, then it evaluated our build-out
with our proposed land use map and that difference was our increase in traffic volumes.
Whether a property was vacant and now has a single family home on it is not going to
generate a whole lot of traffic that would impact the conclusion of our traffic study. Meaning
that the one or two houses is not going to add so much traffic that it makes our conclusions
inaccurate. Especially when the traffic study not only considered the City of Grand Terrace
but it's part of the East Valley Traffic Model,which considers the East Valley Region,which
was a document that was created through a consortium of the agencies within the East Valley
Region and it also looks at the traffic for that region. They look at it at that scale that there
is now a new restaurant or office building and that it doesn't generate so much traffic that it
nulls or voids the conclusion of the traffic study.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, responded that it is his understanding that some of those
vacant parcels that we are talking about have not been vacant for close to five years. He
questioned if we started with inaccurate information when we moved forward with the
consultant.
Senior Planner Molina, responded that this has been a process that was started with the
previous director and that she doesn't have an answer, however she feels that it would not
be vastly different.
Community and Economic Development Director Joyce Powers,stated that the General Plan
does not require the inclusion of the existing land use map and that primarily because it's
changing and ever evolving so naturally it would be confusing. The Environmental Impact
Report is more of a study of the conditions and that was the basis of the study. They have
looked at the map to determine whether or not it would change any outcomes mitigation
measures and their conclusions were that it would not. Craig Neustaedter is available if
Council has any additional questions.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, clarified that staff is saying that the age of the map is not
going to make that big of a difference.
Consulting Traffic Engineer Craig Neustaedter,stated the study was conducted by preparing
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 6
a traffic impact study for the General Plan Amendment. There are typically two or more
alternative or scenarios that are studied as part of that process. They look at an existing
conditions scenario and they looked at the existing general plan,which projects growth over
a horizon of approximately to 2030 and then there were general alternatives also projecting
conditions to a future year. All of this was based on a traffic model that is run and
maintained by the City of San Bernardino. The existing conditions map and the existing -
conditions analysis is helpful and instructive in term of describing approximately how
conditions currently are. They are always slightly out of date with respect to what actually
is on the ground just by terms of the process and given that this is a fairly technical process
and dealing with data information. This was the case with the existing conditions analysis.
It was in fact three or four years out of date already. This is a matter that is beyond our
control. As others here have cited and he is sure other traffic engineers would concur, this
information is useful in terms of establishing a bench mark of existing conditions, it's not
exact duplication of existing conditions but it in no way affects the ultimate finding or
relevant conditions that this Council has to act on because that is based on an analysis of
conditions projected to this 2030 horizon year. The analysis for existing conditions does not
affect that horizon year. That is where most of the relevant analysis is done and it is done
on the basis of that long term horizon analysis which they have established what are the
appropriate mitigation measures or overwriting condition that are necessary for the Council
to consider and adopt. He fully concurs with what others have said that this map in terms
of being slightly out of phase with what was actually on the ground is certainly not a problem
in any respect in terms of the ultimate findings and analysis of the traffic study.
Myor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia, questioned if it was cost prohibitive to do this study
ourselves to where it could be more accurate because we know what is on each corner. She
questioned if there was a financial benefit to going with it regional. Should we ever have to
do a model again could it be done just for Grand Terrace so it could be more accurate or is
there some reason why we went through the regional model, which we probably got a cost
savings because it is regional but it is not accurate.
Traffic Engineer Neustaedter, responded that the approach that they took here was clearly
much more cost effective then if we tried to do our own local model. Some agencies do that
but it would have been for a very significant cost. We are talking about $50,000.00 to
$100,000.00 just to do the model development and that would have been prior to any sort of
in depth analysis that would be required to do the EIR traffic Study.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, requested that staff explain, at the end of the Public Hearing, that
even if the map would have been accurate the final decision that is in the plan would not
have changed.
JoAnn Johnson, 12723 Mt.Vernon Avenue,stated that she served on a General Plan Update
Committee for several years and she is aware of the amount of work,discussions,arguments,
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 7
etc.that go into this. No one is ever going to agree with every point,she does not agree with
every point but she certainly agrees with the overall plan and definately supports the plan.
Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, indicated that he supports the General Plan Update.
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, stated that she is submitting a document regarding
the certification of the 2010 General Plan Update,Final Program EIR,and Amendment#6:
To Whom this may concern: Grand Terrace residents local agencies and the State of
California
It is a fact there are past and present officials and staff that know that the accuracy of maps
and major information in some of the most important city documents has been questioned
for years. They also know that there are a lot of things that have been done wrong for many
years which has cost us huge amounts of money which has definately helped contribute to
our current condition.
There are also past and present officials and staffthat know that major information regarding
the update of our General Plan and map accuracy was being questioned in 2007 and
everything has not been revised adequately or noted in the Final Program EIR of our 2010
General Plan Update. Major data has also been used that is outdated, not accurate,
incomplete and illegally processed.
Any study such as a Traffic Impact Analysis is absolutely worthless if it is based on a map
that is not accurate and information that is not all accurate or complete. Also proposed
mitigation would not be accurate based on any of this information and we certainly would
not be prepared for the future when all the proposed or approved projects are finished which
might produce major gridlock.
No one in the City of Grand Terrace has ever proven that the current General Plan Land Use
Map for 1988 which appears undated in the final version printed in 1989 is actually accurate
in all areas. Also the map has no number on it even though it is referred to in text, and
information on the Land Use Chart that indicates acreage does not even match the map
because it is wrong. This map is being referred to in our 2.010 General Plan Update which
includes the DEIR and Amendment#6.
It is also important to note at this time,that Developer Impact Fees that were established in
order to accommodate future growth capital projects which are needed, have been done
wrong for many years and everyone did not pay their fair share. It appears that these fees
were never waived by City Council and it is a violation of our Municipal Code if they are not
paid. This should mean that these fees which amount to a large amount of revenue are still
owed, regardless of how they were done. This could help eliminate some major problems
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 8
that we have right now in our city. These fees are not paid by the RDA and help fund
general government facilities, public meeting facilities, storm drainage facilities, traffic
signal improvements, street improvements, parklands/open space.
It is a fact that RDA has created blight in designated project areas in the City of Grand
Terrace such as the Town Center, Barton Square and Grand Crossings preventing property
owners from doing anything with their property for years. Property in any designated project
area should never have been sold to any developer or any developer given unlimited amounts
of time until they can prove they can follow through and access should never be the last
consideration. Wasting huge amounts of time and money on projects that were never
feasible is absolutely absurd and it only benefits certain people which was not property
owners who may have never wanted to relocate.
Our Planning Commission should never have approved this update to be certified by the City
Council at this time for all of these very important reasons and certain elements should be
re-circulated after everything is accurate. It certainly did not seem to matter how accurate
maps are or anything else when our Building& Safety Director convinced them to approve
the update for other reasons and ignored residents concerns again.
The Moreno Family should be insulted because they are one of the locations which show
their property as vacant on one of the maps in question. They built a home in 2005 and even
won a Home of Distinction award in 2009 because it is so beautiful. One of our Planning
Commissioners was actually one of the judges. Also there are at least fifteen other locations
that also are wrong and it appears that property owners on the other side of La Cadena may
never have been notified.
Edward DeMuth, 12210 Michigan Street, wanted to go on record that he supports the
General Plan Update.
Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, questioned if the Council should vote tonight.
He would appreciate comments from the three Councilmembers as a group each of them as
individuals and even the City Manager. There are only three representatives of five tonight
and he feels that this is about as big of a deal that you can decide upon for this City. He
realizes that this is not something that the Council planned on,Mr. Miller resigned and Bea
Cortes is just not here. He feels that it is appropriate for the Council to vote tonight, you
probably can and it is probably legal for you to vote but he doesn't feel that they should.
Cynthia Bidney, 12219 Pascal,stated that she is addressing the already overstated statement
that the noise and pollution is already exceeding the limits here in Grand Terrace. At the
Planning Commission meeting there was also a map showing the neighborhoods and the
areas that would be the most impacted and one of those was her neighborhood. She is really
concerned that the Council take real caution on agreeing to say that it is ok to over pollute
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 9
her neighborhood. They already will be impacted by whatever is built there and she feels
that by increasing the pollution and noise for her neighborhood they are severely going to
deplete their quality of life and their right to quiet enjoyment of their own properties. Not
to mention the increased respiratory illnesses that will come of this. She is hoping that the
Council will explain what they plan to do to protect her neighborhood and those that are
going to be impacted.
Janese Makshanoff, 21816 Vivienda Avenue, stated that she lives in the re-designated area
as the Industrial Flood Plain area. At the Commission Meeting staff was directed to research
the changing of the code as was mentioned. They contacted the property owners with
another option other than the zone change, it was a municipal code change. At this meeting
they were asked if they wanted a workshop,maybe she misunderstood, but she thought that
the workshop was going to be with the commission so that they could ask questions and get
some feedback. All three houses down there were there long before the City was and they
have been through a few zones and none were wanted by any of the residents. She would
like to ask the City, do they have plans for this area because if the City does not they do.
They want to continue to live there and raise their family grow old and have some piece of
mind.
Mayor Ferre closed the Public Hearing and returned discussion to the Council.
_ Mayor Pro Tern Garcia,appreciates the comments that have been made by the residents and
would like to go through each issue that has been brought up by them. She understands how
the residents feel that live in the designated industrial area. It seems like they are saying that
the Planning Commission recommended it and so we go ahead and move forward but they
still are out in limbo. It is not something that can be guaranteed and will still need to go
through a public hearing process.
Senior Planner Molina, responded that the code amendment would need to go through the
process of both the Planning Commission and City Council. The Commission did suggest
that the Council consider directing them to amend the General Plan at a later date to return
that area to residential, however, we don't necessarily recommend that approach.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, questioned why it is a flood plain. She stated basically what she
understands is that State regulations say, because there is a higher propensity should there
be the 100 year flood those people would be in danger. She wants to understand from the
City's perspective why the staff is concerned.
Senior Planner Molina,responded that from a land use perspective,you typically don't want
to put structures or residents in an area that is subject to a flood hazard. You have seen
many cases where that has happened in the past and there has been issues. Staff s
perspective is two folded,the flood plain issue and looking at that entire area and changing
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 10
it back to residential or even just a portion of it,they would not want to do just a portion of
it. What they are saying is that they are proposing an alternative that addresses the needs of
the residents to be able to continue to use their homes and expand them or rebuild them
should fire destroy them, which they don't currently enjoy under the non-conforming use
provisions.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia,stated that we would be helping them. She stated that it is kinda like
a variance. She wanted clarification that under this we would allow them to remain there as
long as they want, however, industrial will be built all around them.
Senior Planner Molina, responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if the residents are satisfied with the alternative
that has been given to them.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, stated that Planner Molina has had discussions with the
homeowners. She indicated that as a Council they want to help the homeowners. The
solution that staff came up with she feels if she was in their place she still wouldn't be happy
with it.
Senior Planner Molina, stated to clarify,the property is already zoned Industrial and due to
expansion of flood plain areas by FEMA we had to expand the flood plain industrial
designation. They have met with the property owners and they drafted up some language for
transitional residential uses which would apply to their properties and the non-conforming
use concerns that they expressed during the public hearing. When she last spoke to them she
asked that they meet to discuss the provisions prior to a Planning Commission and she is still
hopeful that they can meet. She feels that they have just missed each others phone calls.
They were told that the first step would be the work shop then to go to the Planning
Commission and then the Planning Commission would make that recommendation to the
City Council. The Planning Commission has expressed that they understand the concerns
and they are not comfortable with them not being able to rebuild should the home completely
burn and what they are proposing is language that would allow that, allow the rebuilding in
these areas for those three homes that exist.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, questioned if there is a way, should the Council move forward on
this, to create language that would give a better comfort level to those residents.
Senior Planner Molina, responded that there is language in proposed General Plan for this
particular area that states that existing residential uses can continue to operate under the low
density residential designations. They take that to mean that they would apply the low
density single family residential requirements to it, which allows homes to be expanded or
rebuilt. They feel that there is enough language in the General Plan to support what they are
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page I 1
proposing with regard to that code amendment but it is a separate process.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that she feels that one thing that they can do, should they
move forward,she would like to call that out so that it would specifically address the homes
in this specific area.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, clarified for the Council that as
Sandra mentioned, the current zoning is Industrial and staff is not suggesting that it be
changed or anything along that line. The General Plan does already state that any projects
within that flood plain industrial area would be reviewed under the residential zoning. What
staff is trying to do with moving some new language into the zoning ordinance is to provide
process for doing that. As it is written now, they can only rebuild if it's 75% or less
destroyed. What they are seeking is to be able to rebuild if it is 100% destroyed keeping in
mind that the residents would now have to be raised out of the flood plain. Title 18, the
zoning ordinance already explains the process for non conforming residences so to set this
apart as a transitional use and set up their process does belong in that section along with the
non conforming steps to process it.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that should a motion be made she would want to bring some
emphasis to that.
r"
City Attorney John Hamer, stated that obviously they can't consider the zone code tonight,
but one of the requirements in the zone code is that it be consistent with the General Plan.
To the extent that it hasn't taken into account the language that has been added to the General
Plan it needs to be made consistent.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that when she move to the community she was saddened to
see an Elementary School so close to the freeway because it's not a good thing because of
the noise and the pollution from the freeway. She would like to address Mrs. Bidney's
concerns as far as how are we going to ensure that the residents are protected from pollution.
She expressed her concern with the statement of overriding considerations.
Senior Planner Molina,clarified that there was no map provided at the Planning Commission
that showed the air quality impacts. The map that was provided to the Planning Commission
was on noise not pollution. With regard to air quality,there are several policies and actions
in the open space and conservation element, sustainable development element and even in
the land use element it talks about buffering or separation of uses. All of these policies and
actions that they would implement upon adoption of this General Plan will serve to minimize
air quality impacts, however, even with all those goals, policies and actions, at build out of
the General Plan there will be air quality impacts which based upon the standards that are in
place today would create a significant impact that we can't avoid. There are policies in
place, there are actions that are in place but they are not adequate to fully mitigate impacts.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 12
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, questioned if the air quality issues are from mobile sources.
Senior Planner Molina,responded that it is from mobile and from operational sources,all the
uses that exist today emit some sort of air emission. As the General Plan is built out, they
are going to continue to emit omissions. There are things that can be done to minimize those
emissions,but at the end of the day using what we have in place as far as standards when that
build out analysis is provided it demonstrates that we will have impacts that we can not
mitigate based upon the standards that are in place through the air quality resources board.
City Attorney Harper, stated that even with the General Plan today you would have to adopt
the statement of overriding considerations in order to have what we have today. By
definition, build out of anything increases the potential impact from air pollution and as a
result every General Plan has to acknowledge that if you add five more cars you are
increasing the potential environmental impact on the air and you can't adequately mitigate
that because any development that results in those five cars is going to result in that whether
it is a house or a shopping center.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, she is fine knowing that we live in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District. It has always been her belief and hope that whenever standards are
going forward we are creating buffers and encouraging any regional traffic to stay on the
freeway and don't impact our neighborhoods. She feels that it seems like we are not doing
that.
Senior Planner Molina, stated that the other way to look at that is even if we did not adopt
our General Plan and built out what we have right now,you are still going to have air quality
impacts because that growth is occurring and under todays standards it is going to be
significant.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia,questioned if it is certain neighborhoods or is it the City as a whole.
Senior Planner Molina,responded that it is the City as a whole. What they would require and
what they have been requiring is that larger projects such as Town Square is that they prepare
air quality studies that are project specific to what is being proposed on that property and its
impact to the surrounding area. This is a General Plan that talks about generalized broad
scoped items but when it comes down to implementing the General Plan projects like Town
Square or the Grand Crossing Projects they will look at specific air quality impacts relative
to that project and the surrounding area.
MUor Pro Tern Garcia, questioned if it is stated in the General Plan that we will do the
strongest buffer that we can legally do to ensure the residents are protected. We need
development to help the sales tax to help provide services for our residents but one of the
most important things to our residents is their neighborhoods and they stay nice and safe.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 13
She would like a better comfort level from staff that those buffers are through all the
language going to be the absolute strongest.
Mayor Ferre,stated that as she sees it,this is city-wide and we are talking about impacts city-
wide. Specifics such as the Town Center,when it comes to mitigating noise,pollution,etc.
that will be done specifically for that particular project and the standards will be very much
tighter than they are for city wide because we are speaking in generalities for the General
Plan.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,stated that Mayor Ferrd is correct
and that each project will have to do their own separate environmental impact report.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz,stated that from a big picture stand point we are talking about
what he believes to be a regional issue, if there was no build out would we still be dealing
with these mitigating circumstances that they could not resolve.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, responded in the affirmative.
Senior Planner Molina, stated that if there was absolutely no growth there would be
additional air quality impacts just based upon regional traffic. Would the air quality impact
rise to the level of full build out of our General Plan,it may not,however,we will have some
increase.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz, stated that this is giving us the ability to look at it and know
what is coming and we are going to put those measures in place to limit it as much as we can
but even if we don't build out we are still going to have these issues to deal with that are out
of our control.
Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields,SANBAG and CALTRANS as we know
are working on the I215 gap closure and we all know that it is a proj ect that is needed to keep
the flow of traffic going and it helps the emissions. They also plan to do the Barton Road
overpass,which will remove our bridge and construct a new bridge with on-ramps and off-
ramps. While that project is moving along perfectly right now and the only situation that
they have is if we don't get done with our General Plan,then that whole situation will slow
down and we may possibly lose funding for the I215 Barton Road overpass. It is something
that is very important especially with the proposed developments,having a new bridge and
having vehicles on that bridge that flow and circulate very neatly is something that we need
to do and is something that is going to help the air quality in this city. If the General Plan
Amendment is approved it is actually going to help the pollution.
Mayor Ferre stated that it is before the City Council for consideration the adoption of a City
Council Resolution Certifying the Final EIR prepared for the General Plan Update, the
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 14
Resolution becomes effective upon adoption.
CC-2010-33 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILEMEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT),to adopt a Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact
Report Prepared for the Grand Terrace General Plan Update.
Mayor Ferre stated that it is before the City Council for consideration the adoption of a City
Council Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update Applicable City-Wide,
the Resolution becomes effective upon adoption.
CC-2010-34 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT),to adopt a Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update
Applicable City-Wide and directed staff to proceed with a Development Code
Amendment relating to transitional residential uses in the Industrial Floodplain area,
that includes the three existing homes.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7A. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Grand Terrace
Municipal Code Establishing a No Fireworks Safety Zone
CC-2010-35 MOTION BY MAYOR FERRE, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA,
CARRIED 3-0-1-0, (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to approve
the Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Grand Terrace
Municipal Code Establishing a No Fireworks Safety Zone.
NEW BUSINESS
8A. Third Quarter Budget Review for Fiscal Year 2009/2010
CC-2010-36 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR FERRE,
CARRIED 3-0-1-0, (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to receive
and file the Third Quarter Budget Review for Fiscal Year 2009/2010.
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY
COUNCIL
1. Joint Public Hearing on Amendment No.6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand
Terrace Community Redevelopment Project
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 15
Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for
Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Revised Grand Terrace
Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City-wide
Ordinance Certifying Amendment No, 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand
Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area
Mayor Ferr6 opened the Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Public
Hearing. The purpose of this Joint Public Hearing is to discuss Amendment No. 6 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project. In the form
of the amended and restated redevelopment plan. The City Council and Redevelopment
Agency are separate legal entities under State Law and in this case though the members of
the City Council also sit as members of the Redevelopment Agency and have each consented
to hold a joint public hearing. The public hearing will be conducted as follows,first the staff
will give a presentation on the proposed amendment and related documents. After the staff
presentation then any written correspondence received by the City Clerk will be reviewed.
Finally the members of the public that would like to speak may do so and any one wishing
to speak needs to complete a request to speak card and hand it to the City Clerk. Those who
wish to speak should state their,name,address and organization if applicable for our record.
We ask that you limit your comments to three minutes.
Community and Economic Development Department Powers, stated that over the past 20
years, the Agency has undertaken significant work toward achieving the goals of the
Redevelopment Plan. Although there are many successes on record, the -entire
Redevelopment Project is not yet complete. The following is a list of accomplishments:
- Designed and developed Rollins Park, the Child Care Center, the Fire Station, City
Hall, the Library, and Pico Park. The Agency has also completed the design for a
new baseball field to be built on Agency-owned land.
- Developed and implemented programs for neighborhood improvement,including the
Neighborhood Grant Program,the Commercial Improvement Program,wall-painting
projects, and neighborhood cleanup projects.
- Purchased and cleared property for the City's first dog park.
- Completed the affordable senior villas, senior center, and Petta Park
- Sponsored and supported economic development programs, including business
training, the Chamber of Commerce, and new signage.
The following is a list of projects that are not yet complete:
Barton Road infrastructure improvements
Storm drain and road improvements near Main and Michigan
- Reconstruction of Grand Terrace Road, west of 1-215
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 16
Construction of a new baseball field, the dog park, and other amenities
- Michigan Street improvements
- Affordable family housing
- Correction of drainage deficiencies throughout the City
- Continuing efforts to correct and prevent future deferred maintenance, for
commercial and residential areas, and infrastructure that may not yet be evident
To address the City's future needs and lack of funding, the Community Redevelopment
Agency (Agency) has taken a number of steps toward amending the Redevelopment Plan
(Plan). The basis of the Amendment recommendations is the Agency's$70 million revenue
limit will be reached in approximately two years, and funds no longer will be received for
capital projects (roads, facilities, and parks), economic and community enhancement
programs or housing projects and programs. The existing limitations in the Redevelopment
Plan, if not amended, would force the Agency to now shift its financial focus to repaying
debt service on outstanding bonds, rather than funding new and ongoing projects and
programs. Exacerbating the funding shortfall issue is the fact that the Agency cannot now
collect its maximum allowable revenue due to minimal outstanding debt, which is needed
to justify revenue collection.
Recommended actions include extending the length of time during which the Agency can
continue collecting revenue to meet the Agency's and City's goals. There will be no increase
in taxes,just a longer period of revenue collection, which would increase the total amount
collected over the entire life of the plan. Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan
would accomplish the following:
1. Increase the cumulative tax increment revenue limit in the Redevelopment Plan from
$70 million(net of payments made to certain taxing entities)to approximately$225
million(net of payments made to certain taxing entities)
2. Increase the limit on the amount of bonded debt that may be outstanding at any one
time in the redevelopment plan from$15 million to approximately$75 million(this
does not approve a bond issue)
3. Extend the effectiveness of the redevelopment plan and time limit to collect tax
increment revenue by the following time frames:
a. Original Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area("Original
Area")extend plan effectiveness from July 15,2017,to September 27,2022,
and time limit to collect tax increment from July 15,2027,to September 27,
2032
b. Area added by the first amendment to the Grand Terrace Community
Redevelopment Project Area("Added Area")extend plan effectiveness from
July 15, 2017 to July 15, 2024 and time limit to collect tax increment from
July 15, 2027 to July 15, 2034
4. Rescind the Agency's authority to commence eminent domain within the Project
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 17
Area, effective immediately following the effectiveness of the ordinance adopting
Amendment No. 6
5. Replace the description of land uses in the redevelopment plan with language that
directly refers to the City's General Plan,zoning ordinance,and other applicable land
use policies and standards, as they exist today or are hereafter amended; and
6. Amend and restate the redevelopment plan to incorporate the prior amendments into
a single document.
To date; the Redevelopment Agency has approved and circulated several documents for
public review,including the Draft Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan prepared in
connection with Amendment No. 6, the Preliminary Report, the Draft Amended Owner
Participation Rules for Property Owners, Owners of Businesses,and Business Tenants,and
the Report to City Council. The documents also have been provided to affected taxing
agencies.
In addition to posting and publishing public notices,the Agency is required by State Law to
notify individual parties that may be affected by the Amendment. Because the entire City
is within the Redevelopment Project Area, 5,320 notices were sent by mail to individual
addressed. As a result of the mailing,staff received ten requests for additional information.
Each caller indicated that he or she was not familiar with the Redevelopment Project and
( were unsure as to why they would receive such a notice. No calls were received indicating
an objection to the Plan Amendment or Project.
As previously stated, further redevelopment is necessary to address the remaining blight
within the Project area, such as improvements to Michigan Street and construction of new
public facilities. Also, a lack of necessary office and commercial facilities in the Project
Area requires residents to travel outside the City to purchase needed goods and services. The
lack of needed businesses also has a negative effect on general fund sales tax revenues.
Vacant property in the southwestern portion of the Project Area remains undeveloped due
to inadequate public infrastructure and other physical conditions that hinder development.
The Agency may correct drainage deficiencies,for example,to render site more developable.
Also, deterioration over time has caused some buildings in the Project Area to be unsafe or
unfit for use,which must either be cleared or rehabilitated. The presence.of a higher rate of
crime in certain portions of the project Area creates a burden on the rest of the community
by demanding a disproportionate share of police and code enforcement resources.
It is estimated that the Agency will reach the current tax increment limit of$70 million in
fiscal year 2010-13, and will have no ability to collect additional tax increment without an
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. The estimated costs to complete the Project and
meet the goals of the original Redevelopment Plan, are estimated (at today's construction
costs) to be between $30 and $40 million. Because the Agency has already collected
approximately $62.4 million since 1980, the Agency may only collect approximately $7.6
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 18
million in tax increment revenues until fiscal years 2009-10 and 2012-13, leaving a
significant deficit. Amendment No. 6 would raise the existing tax increment limit to $225
million, allowing the Agency to collect tax increment revenues until fiscal year 2033-34.
Because it is difficult to forecast infrastructure needs and the taxable value of new
development over the next 14 years,the revenue limit is proposed high,and may or may not
be achieved entirely.
It is important to note that the City's current revenue sources are not adequate to maintain
a constant level of City-wide basic services much less fund the public infrastructure,
developmental remediation, revitalization or affordable housing programs in the Project
Area. Also, a portion of annual redevelopment revenues are currently used to assist with
funding the City's community enhancement and neighborhood improvement programs,
housing programs,economic development programs,and planning and public works projects
and programs. According to the Agency's fiscal year 2009-10 Statement of Indebtedness,
redevelopment revenues are contribute approximately$800,000 to costs that otherwise would
be funded by the General Fund. The costs are primarily for facility and infrastructure
improvements and staff time to implement these projects and programs.
The lack of redevelopment revenue would also have a critical impact on current City staffing
levels and the continuation of many City services. The most difficult period for the City
would be from 2012-13 when Agency revenue has surpassed its $70 million cap and funds
cease to be collected, through 2017 when the existing Plan would no longer be effective.
From 2012 to 2017, the Agency will still be required to meet its legal obligations, such as,
develop and monitor affordable housing projects and make debt payments, but without
revenue to do so.
The following summarizes the additional implications if Amendment No.6 is not approved:
- The Agency is still obligated to meet the low and moderate income housing fund
targeting requirements as described in the Agency's current Implementation Plan.
- The Agency would need to assign the responsibility for monitoring affordable
housing projects to the City.
- Bond obligations must be met by the Agency. The Agency would need to shift most
of its remaining funds to pay bond debt service and terminate nonhousing programs
immediately.
- Even if the Agency stops receiving tax increment revenue, it would still be required
to complete administrative activities, which include an audit, annual reports, etc.
- Assets owned by the Agency may need to be liquidated or sold in order to terminate
any carry costs (now managed by staff).
She requested that Public Works Director Richard Shields address some of the current
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 19
conditions with the Public Infrastructure.
Building and Safety/Public Works Director Richard Shields, stated that with the opening of
the Grand Terrace High School in 2011 we are going to see a lot of additional traffic on
Michigan Avenue and we all know that we need sidewalks, curb and gutter and we need to
underground the utilities in that area. Their goal is to start this project in the beginning of
this next fiscal year. In order to do that we have to have the design of the street prepared and
prepare the acquisitions for right of way. They have to complete the environmental review
process,which takes a very long time. They have to obtain right of way for widening and
fund the construction for the widening. All of this is very costly and we are going to need
redevelopment funds to accomplish these goals. He has three other projects that were
mentioned earlier. The City was designed in a grid system and everything comes from Blue
Mountain down to the basin towards the freeway. We have Pico Street, Van Buren Street
and DeBerry Street that are designed to basically carry a lot of the flood waters. We have 12
inch curb facings in this area to do that. In some areas we don't have any curbs or gutters
and some of the residents have designed their own curb and gutter to help mitigate some of
the water that may come over. Redevelopment funds in the future are going to be needed to
design the hydrology for picking up that storm water. We have to design the storm water
system once the hydrology is completed. We have to complete the environmental that goes
along with that as a State requirement and we have to fund construction improvements.
Along with those improvements will be a repaving of Pico,DeBerry and Van Buren and of
course we want to look at the possibility of upgrading all of the corner handicap ramps to
facilitate the removal of barriers per ADA. This is something that we need to have
redevelopment funds for and it is essential that we do. We need to widen the street and
install a traffic signal at Mt.Vernon Avenue and Grand Terrace Road heading north towards
Colton city limits. With the 1215 gap closure, after the Barton Road Bridge is constructed,
Caltrans and SANBAG is on line to do the Washington Bridge overpass if funds are
available through the Federal Government. Once that project is done we are going to have
a bottle neck at Grand Terrace Road and Mt.Vernon without having a signal and not having
a wide enough roadway coupled with the fact that we have the Riverside Canal that goes
through the side of that hill. This city is going to need redevelopment funds in order to
accomplish that goal. We need to install signals at the corner of Mt. Vernon Avenue and
Van Buren,Pico and Mt. Vernon and Main Street and Mt. Vernon. We all know that there
is 2500 graded pads in the County of Riverside not to mention all of the commercial property
that is going to spring up there as well. Those traffic flows are going to come through our
City and we need to be prepared for that. We are going to need redevelopment funds to
assist with building those traffic signals because development impact fees that we get from
the County will probably not be enough to complete the project. Redevelopment funds here
are extremely important. Staff is recommending approval of this Ordinance so that the
infrastructure improvements in our City pace the development that is coming here and also
pace the development in the outlining areas of the County, Colton and other areas.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 20
City Attorney John Harper, it is something that seems obvious to City people and Staff but
maybe not to the public. The City does not have the legal ability to leverage its money. The
City can not issue general obligations bonds, it is against the law. The only way a City can
issue debt is by going to the ballot but it requires the raising of taxes. The Redevelopment
Agency does not raise taxes and it has the ability to leverage that money.
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, stated that notice of this hearing
was provided by the following actions: (1) publication of the notice of joint public hearing
in the San Bernardino Sun on March 29, April 5, April 12 and April 19, 2010; (2) mailing
approximately 5,320 notices to all property owners, businesses and residents in the project
area via first class mail in the Project Areas that the Agency could identify; and(3)mailing
notices to all affected taxing entities via certified mail. She has provided proofs of those
mailings and publication and all that is required to the City Clerk's office for the record. She
stated that she received 10 phone calls. Everyone of the phone calls were requesting
additional information about exactly what the City was doing and were unaware that they
were in the redevelopment area. They also only received one phone call from the
Community College District and they were just clarifying that the amendment would not
change their pass through.
Mayor Ferre requested that the City Clerk summarize any written correspondence received
on the Amended Plan.
City Clerk Brenda Mesa, reported that she received 5 letters regarding the amendment and
that copies were provided to each of the Councilmembers. All letters were in favor of the
amendment.
Councilmember Stanckiewitz,requested some examples of"correct site deficiency to make
underutilized land desirable for development".
Community and Economic Development Director Powers, responded that the most
significant example that comes to mind in the City of Grand Terrace is the southwestern
portion of the City where you have looked at projects such as the Outdoor Adventures Center
and Grand Crossings. We are talking about 100 acres there that could be developed. Today
it is severely impacted by poor drainage and topography that would make it impossible in
terms of financial feasibility to develop and that is where a redevelopment agency could
come in. The developer would have to build roads for ingress and egress. The other thing
that they look at is there any contamination on the property small parcels that are so small
that they can not be develop even although they may be zoned commercial they are only 50
feet wide.
Sylvia Robles,23008 Orangewood Court,did a power point presentation,stating that we are
proposing $25 million in new debt, $17 million of that will be in interest payments. $1.7
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 21
million in administrative costs. There are no projects for youth,recreation, sports fields or
libraries. All costs are to support future development. The health and safety code requires
an explanation of why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the project area can
not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the
legislative body's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. Why do
we need our public funds to do this. We have not proven that the entire city of Grand
Terrace is blighted. We have not proven that using property tax revenues to fund private
investment in commercial/retail development is beneficial to the City. To make the case that
investing in private enterprise will increase the City tax base is really not working. We are
down 11% in our revenues and real estate values are plunging. There is no lack of grocery
stores,banks or retail establishments,in fact we have two failed grocery stores in a one mile
radius, a former AlbertsonsNons, we have had bank failures but yet we have two banks.
Crime is one of the lowest in the County and the privately funded Walgreens and Fresh n
Easy have been put on hold due to the lack of consumer demand. Pursuant to Health and
Safety Code the burden has to be proven that it can not reasonably be expected to be reversed
by private and/or governmental action without redevelopment. The City has to provide
alternative funding that could be used in lieu of tax increment financing. We built the City
Hall,the parks,and the Child Care Center. Her concern is that why are we doing properties
that should be done by private capital. This is again a very little known part of government
of debt. This is a global policy issue,she has no problem with the things that directly benefit
the residents. It is not the City's fault that we have in a State with this kind of local fiscal
relationship. It is something that we have to globally address and her recommendation would
be to ask the State for some of the RDA money to be put back into our coughers. That way
we can do bonds and we can vote for them directly. We can issue general obligation bonds
but we must vote on them. When a RDA does this citizens do not have a chance to
determine where that money goes.
Cynthia Bidney, 12219 Pascal, discussed elements of blight. The Health and Safety Code
describes physical conditions that cause blight which are buildings in which it is unsafe or
unhealthy for persons to live or work. Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the
viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. The report photographs private properties that the
owners could fix under code enforcement, this does need to be paid for by RDA via tax
payers money. In this economy with the current vacancy level and people losing their jobs
we will not pay back$44 million in her lifetime or her children's lifetime. Taxpayers money
should be spent on projects that benefit its citizens and not developers, bond agents, and
attorneys. Let the people vote. City Council Members making decisions as the
Redevelopment Agency is a conflict of interest because the RDA depends on using taxpayer
money without tax payers vote regarding private development. Amendment No. 6 should
be put on the ballot for November in order to avoid a conflict. A complete accountability
should be included. More elements of blight include: Adjacent or nearby incompatible land
uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. The
existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple ownership and whose physical development
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 22
has been impaired by their irregular shapes and inadequate sizes,given present planning and
zoning standards and present market conditions. This subdivision describes economic
conditions that cause blight: Depreciated or stagnant property values. Impaired property
values due in significant part, to hazardous waste on property. Is it governments job to be
a real estate agent for the private developer? Elements of blight continued:Abnormally high
business vacancies,abnormally low lease rates or an abnormally high number of abandoned
buildings. A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in
neighborhoods including grocery stores,drug stores,and banks and other lending institutions
all of which we have. Serious residential overcrowding which has resulted in significant
public health or safety problems. An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented
businesses that has resulted in significant public health,safety,or welfare problems. A high
crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. We don't have
over crowded bars or liquor stores,but the City approved an adult-oriented tattoo parlor. We
do have Space for lease at the town center, a closed out of business Hollywood Video
Center, a stalled Walgreens/Fresh n Easy site that is privately funded, an empty Starbucks
in Grand Terrace,Vacant office space in Grand Terrace,failed Albertsons in Cooley Ranch,
failed Voris in Cooley Ranch, failed pharmacy in Cooley Ranch, failed Kmart, $12 million
RDA funds in Cooley Ranch. Grand Terrace empty medical office space and empty store
fronts in Grand Terrace Center. You may resolve your RDA problem but you will create
more blight because you can't fill all of this space that you want to build.
Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, feels that the property taxes generated in Grand Terrace
should be spent in Grand Terrace not in Needles or Chino or some other part of the County
therefor he supports Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan.
JoAnn Johnson, 12723 Mt.Vernon Avenue,this is a huge project and she certainly feels that
Grand Terrace would be significantly better off to approve the Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan.
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, stated that it is important to note at this time that
developer impact fees that were established in order to accommodate future growth capital
projects,which are needed,have been done wrong for many years and everyone did not pay
their fair share. It appears that these fees were never waived by the City Council and it is a
violation of the Municipal Code if they are not paid. This should mean that these fees,which
amount to a large amount of revenue are still owed regardless of how they were done. This
could help eliminate some major problems that we have right now in our City. These fees
are not paid by the RDA and help fund general government facilities, public meeting
facilities, storm drainage facilities, traffic signal improvements, street improvements, park
lands and open space. Collect that money instead of getting more. It is a fact that RDA has
created blight in designated project areas in the City of Grand Terrace such as the Town
Center,Barton Road and Grand Crossings. Preventing property owners from doing anything
with their property for years. Property in any designated project areas should never have
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 23
been sold to any developer or any developer given unlimited amounts of time until they can
prove that they can follow through and adequately. Adequate access should never be your
last consideration,which it often is. Wasting huge amounts of time and money that should
have been used to process an honest accurate General Plan. Do you realize that you just
certified a plan that doesn't consider the high school. She doesn't believe that it is a slight
error. To expect that she is going to trust you to mitigate all of the problems that you have
' caused when the law requires that you completely screen from not only residents but the
public. Things like the trucking business on Michigan,you have illegal use on land and you
are passing it to agencies telling them that this land is allowed for this and you are hurting
us terribly. Essco is not on the map, a tatto parlor in the middle of town, things are out of
control and because you were so negligent in the way you've processed the General Plan now
you say now forget it we don't care if it is accurate just throw a few million dollars there.
You have had the chance to correct this stuff and to collect fees, which our City has not
collected for years, and process paper work properly. She does not believe for one minute
that with the negligence about the high school that you won't run a road right through her
property to make up for your negligence. She is so insulted and offended by the lack of
accurate information that is presented constantly at these meetings.
B.J.Ghuman,23186 Glendora Drive,feels that the City should progress and that the Council
should adopt the Redevelopment Amendment.
Charles Hornsby,22656 Brentwood Street,stated that the proposal that is before the Council
tonight is to set yourself up so that you can borrow more money from a State that doesn't
have it to lend. If you think that is a good idea,by all means go ahead. If you do so,you are
using bad judgement and at the very least you should forfeit the right to complain about the
fiscal irresponsibility that Sacramento shows. Cities, towns and communities state-wide
need to come to grips with the fact with whatever money you spend in the name of
redevelopment only serves to increase California's debt load and makes it more expensive
for the State to borrow,which it does on a regular basis. This is a simple fact of life in our
State and we are inching ever closer to being at junk bond level. Look at what happened in
Greece, they are bankrupt. Don't think for a minute that it can't happen here. Perhaps the
more important issue, that just came up tonight, is the built in conflict of interest that is
present in our town. This is not a reflection on current City Staff but Council on a regular
basis takes advice if not direction from the Redevelopment Agency and very much from the
City Manager. The simple fact of the matter is, much of the City Manager's salary comes
from redevelopment money. He doesn't know you can expect an unbiased opinion from a
City Manager on a proposed redevelopment project when a great deal of the City Manager's
salary comes from redevelopment money itself. Joyce showed you some pictures. Those
were nothing more than pictures of life in a small town. Mr.Harper makes a good point,the
City can't generate funds very easily but what he doesn't say is those funds still have to come
from somewhere. There is only so much money in the State. If the City doesn't generate the
funds the State has to generate the funds. It's not an honest statement that he made,it's just
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 24
one side of it. He has lived here for 18 years now and he does not see that the City is any
better or any worse really than it was when he moved here. A lot of effort has gone into
redevelopment and he doesn't see any pay-off. It's still a nice city to live in just like it was
before.
Wayne Whipple, 12090 Rosedale Avenue, stated that the Redevelopment Agency is not a
perfect thing, we are human and we make mistakes but he feels that all in all if you go out
into other cities and you tell them where you live they will say what a nice City Grand
Terrace is. We are a gem amongst all cities and he feels that we should keep moving in this
direction and continue with the Redevelopment Agency.
Jeffrey McConnell,21758 Walnut Avenue,appreciates the explanation of the Amendment.
He stated that the Redevelopment money comes from taxes that the property owners in town
already pay. If we don't use it, we lose it. Let's use it. If we don't use it San Bernardino
County will use it somewhere where we would never see it. If we don't have the money here
for aging infrastructure when the time comes and we need it then we can pass a bond but we
can't pass a bond to raise money for every two years and then there is no guarantee that it
will pass. The economic times are still hard they are not going to vote to raise taxes,they
don't have the money. He says to keep the redevelopment money here. The empty buildings
is very typical of a down economy. He saw it when he first came here in 2000. Part of the
problem is that we are geographically boxed in by La Loma Hills,the terrace as well as blue
mountain. What we need is to develop the 123 acres for a large retail or other business that
brings in money that draws from a very large demographic area. If it requires the
redevelopment agency money to help us to do that then it accomplishes that Grand Terrace
can draw from that and remain Grand Terrace. I believe most of us do not want to be County
again. As Mr. Hornsby says, Greece is going bankrupt, he agrees he does not want Grand
Terrace to go bankrupt. If we don't have the RDA money the chances of us going bankrupt
is high. What is the RDA payoff for Grand Terrace,Grand Terrace is a nice place to live and
it still is because we have been utilizing redevelopment money to make Grand Terrace a
beautiful place to live.
Bobbie Forbes, 11850 Burns Avenue, stated that she lives on one of the blighted streets in
the town. She does not want sidewalks in front of her home. She has not thought it out like
some of the other speakers tonight. She stated that she sells real estate in Grand Terrace and
everyone wants to live here. We need to keep our money in town and spend our money in
our community and not let anyone else get it. We have things that need to be addressed,
whether they be in your neighborhood or mine. The house that Joyce showed a picture of
on Burns Avenue is an empty house. It is a house that was built in a walnut grove in the
early 1900's. It belongs to someone that lives up on Miriam Way. It is just sitting there.
They have tried to sell it, unfortunately he turned down $335,000.00 on the property when
the market was really high and probably couldn't get$100,000.00 now. It does look bad but
it is just going to sit there for long time until someone comes in or develops that property.
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 25
Her home is one of the newer homes in her neighborhood. She has a field across from her
that she has been maintaining for twelve years so she doesn't have to go to the vet and pay
$500.00 fox tail bill for one of her cats or dogs. She can't wait for the County or City to take
care of it, it's not worth it for her. It's an area that is big lots and it's hard to keep up
especially in the spring and right now it looks blighted. She loves where she lives, please
don't put in street lights or sidewalks but please fix the road and Grand Terrace Road. Please
keep our money here and please spend it in our community and don't let them take it.
Mayor Ferre closed the public hearing and returned the discussion to the Council.
Mayor Pro Tern Garcia,stated that so much has been presented here this evening and that she
appreciates all of the comments and letters. At this point she is still trying to process
everything that she just heard. Feels that there is one group of people that want to keep the
City going in the same direction and there is another group that has concerns about taking
on more than we can handle. It comes down to looking at the future and how we see the
City. She stated that economic development is something that you do continually. Some of
the things that are going on in the City is due to the economy and out of our control. She
questioned as we are addressing the blighted areas and created new things how are we going
to ensure we maintain the integrity of a lot of these vacancies and filling what our existing
stock is?
Community and Economic Development Director Powers,responded that as we all know a
lot of tenants will have a tendency to move to the nicer newer facility and that is the reason
that she has been such a proponent of the rehab programs commercial and residential. We
could probably name a couple of centers that are really in need of rehab,which goes directly
back to keeping them occupied. No one starting a new business wants to be in a run down
center and that is where our programs can help in making sure that those stay filled.
Mayor Pro Tem Garcia,stated that when people think of redevelopment it's not just creating
new it's maintaining and taking care of what we have. The important thing for her as we
move forward is that the Redevelopment Plan will look at the City as a whole and that there
will be a focus on maintaining our City integrity as a quality place to live. She stated that she
feels that if you let infrastructure go it will cost ten times more when you have to fix it so she
feels that it is important to maintain it.
Councilmember Walt Stanckiewitz, stated that all of the Councilmembers received a
thorough letter from Darcy McNaboe that laid out her impression of where we are and where
we are going with redevelopment. As he read through it he found himself agreeing with her.
She touched on some things that he wanted to share. The first thing she talked about was
local elected officials can be held accountable to local constituents more effectively then
elected officials with no ties to the community. If he messes up,he is out. The people make
that decision. If someone in the County messes up you are a few thousand votes out of
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 26
hundreds of thousands of votes. Having the Redevelopment money in Grand Terrace and
Council making the decisions, the Council will be accountable for it. Mistakes have been
made in the past and money may have been wasted but hopefully we have learned and
hopefully we are going to go forward and we are going to do the right things. He would like
to see the community involved more. He is glad there has been public participation this
evening. As the Redevelopment Agency goes forward, if they approve it, that public
participation needs to continue. They need to hear from everyone what is important to them.
How much benefit a neighborhood can realize from the Redevelopment Plan is focused on
the specific needs of that neighborhood. Who better can tell what they want than the people
that live there. Bonds are taking on debt but it is long term debt that is not credit card
interest rate type debt and it's not necessarily coming from the State but if we don't take on
debt then we can't take care of business and he is not talking about taking care of commercial
business. He is talking about taking care of business infrastructure and drainage. He has
seen the rivers coming off of blue mountain and something needs to be done and we are not
going to be able to do that without redevelopment. If we don't have this we will be
competing with larger cities for the money that we chose not to go get. He stated that every
dollar of redevelopment agency spending generates 13 dollars of economic activity,jobs and
tax revenue. You take the whole big picture and there is benefit to this. Yes there is a cost
and yes we are going to incur debt but if you take the picture,in the end we should come out
ahead. He does not want to revert to a piece of unincorporated San Bernardino County and
that is his fear if we do not approve this.
Mayor Marietta Ferre,believes that it was a miracle that the City of Grand Terrace became
a City 30 plus years ago. She is aware that this City could not have remained a City without
the Redevelopment Agency and at this point if we do not continue with the Redevelopment
Agency she fears greatly for the success of this City in the future. She feels that this is a very
important point in the life of the City of Grand Terrace and she believes that it rests on the
Redevelopment Agency.
Mayor Ferre requested that the City Attorney advised the Council on how to proceed based on the
comments received.
City Attorney Harper indicated that the Public Hearing is Closed and that the Council can proceed
if there is a motion.
CC-2010-37 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS
ABSENT), to approve a Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental
Impact Report Prepared for Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the
Revised Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City-Wide.
CC-2010-38 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, SECOND BY MAYOR
Council Minutes
04/27/2010
Page 27
FERRE, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
approve the first reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No. 6 to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Proj ect Area.
CLOSED SESSION
9A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation - CG 54956.9 (b)(2) and
GC54956.9 (c)
Mayor Ferre announced that the Council met in Closed Session to have a Conference with
Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation CG 54956.9 (b)(2) and GC54956.9 (c) and that there
was no reportable action taken.
Mayor Ferre adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m., until the next City Council Meeting which is
scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 6:00 p.m.
CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace
i-�
MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace
"� � � t,ate•
Historical & Cultural Activities Committee ,FAR
Minutes for April 5, 2010 '
CITY QF(3RAND !'FRRACF
The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. by Chairperson Pauline Grant:Jkd§eERK'S !;r;,,�r,
present were Pauline Grant, Peggy Reagan, Shelly Rosenkild, Ann Petta, Gloria Ybarra,
City Clerk Brenda Mesa and Frances Carter.
Secretary's Report: The minutes for March 1, 2010 were read and approved on a motion
by Ann, seconded by Frances. All in favor. Motion carried.
` Treasurer's Report: The budget shows a balance of$ 936.16. The Petty Cash balance is
$ 128.21.
Historical Report: Ann and Shelly arranged Frank Tetley's 4-H Club hat in the glass
display case as was discussed in the previous minutes.
Old Business: 26`h Annual Art Show, May 2, 2010
Ann reported that currently one application has been received. She added that she is
expecting a good number more and has many calls out.
Shelly will deliver the poster to Brenda for printing and will tend to the background
music, artists' questionnaire and put up the billboards two weeks prior to the Show.
Shelly will coordinate with Peggy on the pick-up of the balloons.
i
Ann will contact the City concerning the list pertaining to the miscellaneous set-up of the
items needed for the Show.
Masako will tend to the supplies and she and Gloria will deliver the posters to the local
businesses.
After viewing and approving the printed invitations, the committee agreed that the
invitations will be sent to the city mayor, councilmembers, city manager, Planning
Commission, Lion's Club and the Woman's Club. An invitation will also be put in the
scrapbook.
Brenda advised that the labels for the artists' names are ready.
Refreshments for the Show will include sandwiches, brownies, cookies and chocolate-
covered strawberries.
On Saturday, May 1, the committee members will arrive at 12:45 p.m. and stay until
:Lpproximately 3-4 p.m. to set-up the art exhibits, etc.. return at 7:00 p.m. and stay until
approximately 9:30 p.m. to finish. On the day of the Show, Sunday, May 2"d, members
arriaal time will be l 1:45 a.m. the Art Show will run from 1:00-4:00 p.m.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.
1
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. The next committee meeting is scheduled for
May 3, 2010.
Re pectfully Submitted,
Gloria Yb
Secretary
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting n� 5
MINUTES
April 6,2010 JTY OF GRAND TERRACE
a rY CI-ERK'q F'-f-5.R'TMENT
The Grand Terrace Emergency Operations Committee met at the regular time at the Emergency
Operations Center at 22795 Barton Road, Building 3. The meeting was called to order by Interim
chairperson, Randy Halseth at 6:00 p.m. Agendas and minutes were distributed.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hanni Bennett, Randy Halseth, Debra Hurst,JoAnn Johnson,Glenn Nichols,
Susan Taylor, and Jim Vert.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lew Neeb,Vic Pfenninghuasen and Oscar Santana.
CITY STAFF: None
GUESTS PRESENTA NTRODUCTIONS: None
CORRESPONDANCE/COMMUNICATIONS: None
APPROVAL OF AGENDA,with a motion by Debra Hurst and second by Hanni Bennett.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 2,2010 with a motion by Debra Hurst and second by Glenn
Nichols.
LIAISON REPORT: Information from Matt Wirt.
A. Saturday April 10 is the Dump Day at the corner of Canal and Mt. Vernon. No hazardous waste
will be accepted.
B. Free compost available from Friday-Sunday,April 23-25 until gone. Bring a shovel and a
container.
C. Radio update-none
D. Grant status-most of the equipment ordered will be next week.
E. City budget-none
F. Storage- What can't be stored in the trailer will be kept in the EOC building. The city would like
us to remove all items in the EOC lot so that the area can be used for staff parking. Randy will
talk to the City Manager about the situation.
G. June 26`h is the scheduled date for Community Days and Car Show.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.3t
1
EQUIPMENT AND FACIIIMS REPORT- Randy Halseth
A. Randy will be scheduling a work day to install shelving in the CERT trailer for the new
equipment.
B. Randy has painted the cabinet to hold the diesel fuel and gasoline a bright red. Randy suggested
asking the city to install a 2,000 gallon gasoline tank for the city to use as well. The gasoline
would be delivered to the city yard.
C. Vic Pfenninghausen submitted a letter of resignation and asked to be relieved of the chairperson
role. Randy Halseth has agreed to fill in for the next 3 months until we can find a permanent f"
chairperson. If Randy continues in this role we will need to hold an election and submit an action -
item to the City Council.
D. Vic is recovering from a fall and will be resting for the next few weeks.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
A. CERT report-This year's exercise will be held tentatively on May 10`h from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m.
Matt Wirz will work with city staff to work the Incident Command Center.
B. Randy has ordered two new placards to be used on any vehicle that is pulling the CERT trailer.
TRAINING/SPEAKERS:None
ADJOURNMENT at 6:23 p.m.
Sue Taylor, Secretary
THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY,MAY 4,2010 @ 6:00 P.M.
F
COMMUNITY EMEM NUTESRESPONSE TEAM {.-' ,f''� 1 .0
MARCH 2, 2010
<:ITY OF GRAND FSnR,4Dc
'ITY CI-ERK'g nFpgRTMFN-,
Members present: Randy Halseth, Jeff Allen, Oscar Santana, Joe Ramos, Debra
Hurst, Sue Taylor, Linda Carter, Matt Wirz, Peggy Witt, Sandy Luckman, Jolene
y. Gustason, Carlos Ramirez, Mil Herman, Jim Stamm, James Vert, Walt Stanckiewitz,
`- Bernie Urrea, Adele Urrea, Joseph Borrielli, Helen Ramos, Hanni Bennett, Glenn
Nichols, Lew Neeb, Mike Cerda, and Vic Pfennighausen.
Members absent: Andrew Anaya, Dragos Barbu, Shannon Bryant, Ingrid Clark,
William Fenn, Lee Ann Garcia, Cliff Homan, James Monroe, Margie Miller, Barrie
Owens, David Ortiz, Bernard Ojeda, Terrilee Robb, Tom Roberts, Lynette Sandiford,
Thomas Schwab, Barb Smeltzer, Ken Smith, Monique Stanchiewitz, Phil Spisak,
Joanne Thoring, Doug Von Kriegelstein, Joyce Wildenauer.
Meeting was called to order at 7:02 pm by Randy Halseth.
Flag salute was given.
Agenda for the March 2, 2010 meeting was approved by members present.
Minutes for the February 2, 2010 meeting were approved by members present.
Treasurers Report: Ending combined balance as of 2-24-2010 is $16,341+.68.
Training. Randy to schedule a 3 hour training session in April.
Old business:
a. CERT Hats/T-Shirts for sale
b. CERT Supplies for Trailer— Purchase order to be presented to City Council
on March 9, 2010. Once approved, order will be placed.
c. Still working on getting a storage building for additional supplies.
d. Sue Taylor working on CERT picnic for the summer.
I
New business:
a. Walk up Blue Mountain — 3-13-10. Sign up sheet passed around for
volunteers.
b. Community Days—6-27-10. Security for night— 6-28-10. Randy volunteered
for him and Mary to participate in the overnight security. Volunteers needed
for morning to assist with traffic and directing the parking of cars.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. �—
1
Member reports:
a. Jeff Allen reported that the City of Redlands is conducting a CERT training
class.
There being no further business to discuss, meeting was adjourned at 8:00 pm.
Next Meeting
April 6, 2010
7:00 pm
City Hall
Debra Hurst
Secretary
COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM
MINUTES
APRIL 69 2010
CITY OF GRNND 'FERRALE
-ITY CLEWS DEPARTMENT
Members present: Randy Halseth, Jeff Allen, Joe Ramos, Debra Hurst, Sue Taylor, Doug Von
Kriegelstein, Jim Stamm, Mil Herman, Barbara Smeltzer, Sandra Luckman, Peggy Witt, Linda
Carter, Walt Stanckiewitz, Bernardo Urrea, Adele Urrea, Hanni Bennett, Helen Ramos, James
Vert, Glenn Nichols, Tom Schwab.
Members absent: Andrew Anaya, Dragos, Barbu, Joe Borielli, Shannon Bryant, Ingrid Clark,
Michael Cerda, William Fenn, Lee Ann Garcia, Jolene Gustafson, Cliff Homan, James Monroe,
Margie Miller, Lew Neeb, Barrie Owens, David Ortiz, Vic Pfennighausen, Bernard Ojeda, Carlos
Ramirez, Terrilee Robb, Tom Roberts, Lynette Sandiford, Oscar Santana, Ken Smith, Monique
Stanchiewitz, Phil Spisak, Joanne Thoring, Joyce Wildenauer, Mathew Wirz.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm.
Flag salute was given.
Guest Paul Tickner was introduced.
Agenda for the April 6, 2010 meeting was approved by members present.
Minutes for the March 2, 2010 meeting were approved by members present.
Treasurers Report: Ending combined balance as of 03/25/10 is $16,358.68.
Training: Joe Ramos gave a talk about being a ham radio operator. Several different levels of
training can be obtained. Explained how a ham radio operator can be helpful in an emergency.
Old business:
a. CERT Hats/T-Shirts for sale.
b. Sue Taylor working on CERT pot luck for CERT members and their families in June.
c. CERT supplies for trailer— Purchase order to be presented to City Council for
approval at March 9, 2010 meeting.
d. Walk up Blue Mountain —Six to seven CERT members showed up to assist walkers.
Good turn out and no major injuries.
New business:
a. Community Days —June 26, 2010—Volunteers needed for assistance with Lions
Club Car Show (assist with traffic and showing attendees where to park). CERT will
have trailer there with information on emergency preparedness.
b. Annual City Earthquake Scenario will be held in May. Watch for upcoming
information.
3
There being no further business to discuss, meeting was adjourned at 7:40 pm.
Next Meeting
May 4, 2010
7:00 pm
City Hall
Debra Hurst
Secretary
n
' AGENDA REPORT
CdI.IFORVI,i
MEETING DATE: May 11, 2010 Council Item ( X ) CRA Item ( )
r" TITLE: Swertfeger Equipment— Modification or Revocation of
{- Conditional Use Permit 99-01, 99-01A2 and 99-01A3, located at
12438 Michigan Street.
PRESENTED BY: Joyce Powers, Community & Economic Development Department
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached Resolution 10-_modifying CUP 99-01,
99-01 A 1, 99-01 A2, 99-01 A3, and SA 03-12.
BACKGROUND:
On January 18, 2001, CUP 99-01 was approved to allow truck repair and to operate the facilities
for self-unloading trailer manufacturing, repair and sales at 12438 Michigan Street. The
( Conditions of Approval included landscaping screening, a trash enclosure, right-of-way
improvements, and parking area improvements. Multiple extensions were filed with the City to
complete the conditions and a new building. As of February.4, 2010 after repeated discussions
and reviews by the Planning Commission, the outstanding conditions had been completed, but
the 12,000 square foot building (SA 99-06) remained uncompleted. The building permit, issued
October 30, 2006, had never been finaled because the fire sprinkler system and building's roll-up
doors were not installed.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the Conditional Use Permit for
modification or revocation on March 4, 2010. The determination to modify the Conditional Use
Permit is to include previous conditions and add clarifying conditions. The Planning
Commission voted 5-0 in favor of modifying the conditions as follows:
1. That all conditions and requirements of the original approval by the Planning Commis-
sion on January 18, 2001 for Conditional Use Permit No. 99-01 (inclusive), SA-99-05,
E-99-01, and SA 03-12 shall remain in full force and effect except as modified herein.
2. All required landscaping shall be maintained in good condition and replaced if no longer
viable. The required vines along the fence line are to till in and provide screening from
adjacent properties by March 4, 2013.
3. The 12,000 square foot building shall be completed and the building permit finaled by
June 4, 2010.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.
1
4. Noise fry.=gin operations shall not be heard from adjacent properties before 7:00 am or after
7:00 pm. Monday through Saturday. Any work done on the property on a Sunday shall
only be v ithin an enclosed building.
5. The approved site plan includes 69, eight feet wide vehicle spaces. All vehicles shall be
parked within these designated areas in accordance with the site plan, and the path of
travel depicted on the approved site plan shall be kept clear.
6. The applicant shall identify the locations of all fire lanes as per the Fire Lane Marking
Standard. This may be done on the architectural plans or by a separate submittal. All fire
lane locations are subject to approval by the Fire Department and may require
modification. The fire lanes shall be installed by the applicant and approved by the Fire
Department by June 30, 2010.
7. No commercial vehicles associated with this business activity shall be parked on the
public street.
8. The Cornmunity and Economic Development Director shall review the status of the CUP
and current on-site conditions annually, in March, beginning in 2011.
9. Any noncompliance with the Conditions of Approval shall be cause to commence a
public hearing to revoke the Conditional Use Permit.
The City Council was scheduled to review the recommendation of the Planning Commission on
April 13,2010, which was continued to May 11, 2010 at the request of the property owner.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has continued working with the property owner's representative to complete outstanding.
items. The Fire Marshal finaled the building and fire sprinkler system on April 13, 2010, and
approved the fire lane plans on April 22, 2010. The Building Official issued the Certificate of
Occupancy for the 12,000 square foot building on April 29, 2010. The building permit will be
finaled when vehicles are moved into the building to open up the fire lanes and the remaining
slag has been laid. Staff anticipates this will be completed by May 15, 2010, and possibly by the
Council meeting date of May I l,h.
As a result, Planning Commission Condition #6 has not been included in the City Council
Resolution. Condition #5 has been modified to state that all vehicles must be parked within the
areas designated on the approved site plan to keep the fire lanes clear. Attachment 2, the City
Council Resolution, reflects these modifications.
On May 6, 2010, the Planning Commission will be reviewing staff s recommendations for the
City Council Resolution, but the Commission will not be requested to modify their Resolution
approved on March 4, 2010. Staff will provide any additional information to the Council as a
verbal report on May I t, 2010.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact other than staff time.
Respectfully submitted,
loyc d Powers
Community and Economic Development Director
Manager Approval: i '
Betsy . Adam
- City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution 10-03
2. City Council Resolution 10-_
3
I
Attachment 1
Planning Commission Resolution 10-03
RESOLUTION NO. 10-03
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND
TERRACE, TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-01, SITE AND
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW NO. 03-12
WHEREAS, the applicant, Thatcher Engineering &Associates, Inc., on behalf of
Swertfeger's Equipment, have applied for the modification of the conditions of approval
of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 99-01, Site and Architectural Review No. 99-06,
Environmental Review Case No. 99-06, and Site and Architectural Review 03-12 to
complete various improvements required by the original approval including those of
Phase 1, 2 and 3 for an additional period of time; and
WHEREAS, a-properly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning
Commission on March 4, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the findings that were made by the Planning Commission regarding
the original approval on January 18, 2001 and February 20, 2003 still apply; and
WHEREAS, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Article 11,
Section 15164, this approval qualifies as an addendum to the original Negative
Declaration in that the modifications to this project do not affect the status of the
Negative Declaration for the original project in that the finding that there is no
substantial evidence that the project, as modified, will have a significant impact on the
environment still applies; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. That all conditions and requirements of the original approval by the Planning
Commission on January 18, 2001 for Conditional Use Permit No. 99-01
(inclusive), SA-99-05, E-99-01, and SA 03-12 shall remain in full force and effect
except as modified herein.
2. All required landscaping shall be maintained in good condition and replaced if no
longer viable. The required vines along the fence line are to fill in and provide
screening from adjacent properties by March 4, 2013.
3. The 12,000 square foot building shall be completed and the building permit
finaled by June 30, 2010.
l
S
4. Noise from operations, including truck idling, ingress, and egress, shall not be
heard from adjacent properties before 7:00 am or after 7:00 pm, Monday through
Saturday. No work shall be done on the property on Sundays.
5. The approved site plan includes 69, eight feet wide vehicle spaces. All vehicles
will be parked within these designated areas in accordance with the site plan.
6. The applicant shall identify the locations of all fire lanes as per the Fire Lane
Marking Standard. This may be done on the architectural plans or by a separate
submittal. All fire lane locations are subject to approval by the Fire Department
and may require modification. The fire lanes shall be installed by the applicant
�- and approved by the Fire Department by June 30, 2010.
7. No commercial vehicles associated with this business activity shall be parked on
the public street.
8. The Community and Economic Development Director shall review the status of
the CUP and current on-site conditions annually, in March, beginning in 2011.
9. Any noncompliance with the Conditions of Approval shall be cause to commence
a public hearing to revoke the Conditional Use Permit.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the,Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California,
at a regular meeting held on the 43t day of March, 2010.
t AYES: 5-
NOES: o
ABSENT: Pone
ABSTAIN: Hone
ATTEST: ;APPROVE AS TO FORM:
co
Brenda Mesa Doug Wilson
City Clerk Chairperson, Planning Commission
r_
Attachment 2
Proposed City Council Resolution
s
7
RESOLUTION NO. 10-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 99-01, SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW NO. 03-12
WHEREAS, the applicant, Thatcher Engineering & Associates, Inc., on behalf of
Swertfeger's Equipment, have applied for the modification of the conditions of approval
of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 99-01, Site and Architectural Review No. 99-06,
Environmental Review Case No. 99-06, and Site and Architectural Review 03-12 to
complete various improvements required by the original approval including those of
Phase 1, 2 and 3 for an additional period of time; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on
April 13, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the findings that were made by the Planning Commission regarding
the original approval on January 18, 2001 and February 20, 2003 still apply; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 4, 2010,
and voted 5-0 to approve the findings and forward the recommendation to City Council
for final determination; and
WHEREAS, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Article 11,
Section 15164, this approval qualifies as an addendum to the original Negative
Declaration in that the modifications to this project do not affect the status of the
Negative Declaration for the original project in that the finding that there is no
substantial evidence that the project, as modified, will have a significant impact on the
environment still applies; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. That all conditions and requirements of the original approval by the Planning
Commission on January 18, 2001 for Conditional Use Permit No. 99-01
(inclusive), SA-99-05, E-99-01, and SA 03-12 shall remain in full force and effect
except as modified herein.
2. All required landscaping shall be maintained in good condition and replaced if no
longer viable. The required vines along the fence line are to fill in and provide
screening from adjacent properties by March 4, 2013.
3. The 12,000 square foot building shall be completed and the building permit
finaled by June 30, 2010.
4. Noise from operations, including truck idling, ingress, and egress, shall not be
heard from adjacent properties before 7:00 am or after 7:00 pm, Monday through
Saturday. No work shall be done on the property on Sundays.
5. All vehicles will be parked within areas designated on the approved site plan to
keep the fire lanes clear.
6. No commercial vehicles associated with this business activity shall be parked on
the public street.
- 7. The Community and Economic Development Director shall review the status of
the CUP and current on-site conditions annually, in March, beginning in 2011.
8. Any noncompliance with the Conditions of Approval shall be cause to commence
a public hearing to revoke the Conditional Use Permit.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a
regular meeting held on the 11`h day of May, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
i- ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brenda Mesa Maryetta Ferre
City Clerk Mayor, City of Grand Terrace
4
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND
TERRACE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace ("City Council")
adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community
Redevelopment Project Area ("Original Area") on September 27, 1979 by
Ordinance No. 25; and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community
Redevelopment Project Area was subsequently amended five times; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 was adopted on March 20, 1980, by Ordinance
No. 31, to authorize the City of Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency
("Agency") to collect tax increment revenue within the Grand Terrace Community
Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"); and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 was adopted on July 15, 1981, by Ordinance No.
52 which added the rest of the City limits (approximately 1,615 acres) to the
original Project Area boundaries ("Added Area"), and adopted a new, amended
Redevelopment Plan applicable to both the Original and Added Areas; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 3 was adopted on July 22, 1999, by Ordinance No.
187 to authorize the use of eminent domain to acquire certain non-residential
property for a 12 year period; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 4 was adopted on September 12, 2002, by
Ordinance No. 202, to clarify the language and original intent of the Agency to
make the tax increment limit for the Project Area (Original and Added Area) net
of pass through payments; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 5 was adopted on July 22, 2004, by Ordinance No.
212, to rescind the previous time limit to incur debt, making it essentially the
same as the duration of the Redevelopment Plan and dependent on the
Agency's ability to collect tax increment to repay any incurred debt and to extend
the time limit of the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Plan (to July 15, 2017),
and extended the time limit for payment of indebtedness and receipt of taxes (to
July 15, 2027) for both the Original and the Added Area; and
WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") has
initiated proceedings to amend the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace
Community Redevelopment Project Area ("Amendment No. 6); and
1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.
1
WHEREAS, he purpose of Amendment No. 6 is to:
1. IncrF:.ase the cumulative tax increment revenue limit in the redevelopment
plan rom $70 million (net of taxing agency payments) to approximately
$225 million (net of taxing agency payments);
2. Increase the limit on the amount of bonded debt that may be outstanding
at any one time in the redevelopment plan from $15 million to
approximately $75 million;
3. Pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety
Code Section 33000, et. seq. ("CRL") Sections 33333.6(a), 33333.6(b),
and 33333.6(e)(2)(C), extend the effectiveness of the redevelopment plan
and time limit to collect tax increment revenue by the following time
frames:
a. Original Area— extend plan effectiveness from July 15, 2017, to
September 27, 2022, and time limit to collect tax increment from
July 15, 2027, to September 27, 2032;
b. Added Area— extend plan effectiveness from July 15, 2017, to July
15, 2024, and time limit to collect tax increment from July 15, 2027,
to July 15, 2034;
4. Rescind the Agency's authority to commence eminent domain within the ' �}
Project Area, effective immediately following the effectiveness of the
ordinance adopting the Amendment No. 6;
5. Replace the description of land uses in the redevelopment plan (as
previously contained in Section IV. Uses Permitted in the Project Area, pp.
33-42) with language that directly refers to the City's General Plan, zoning
ordinance, and other applicable land use policies and standards, as they
exist today or are hereafter amended; and
6. Amend and restate the redevelopment plan to incorporate the prior
amendments into a single document.
By providing the Agency with additional financial resources and extending the
redevelopment plan duration to that allowed under the CRL, Amendment No. 6
will assist in the elimination of blighting conditions that remain in the Project Area,
will assist in preventing the reoccurrence of such remaining blighting conditions,
and will enable the Agency to fully achieve the goals and objectives for
redevelopment of the Project Area pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan for the
Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area.; and
WHEREAS, the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for the Grand
Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area, prepared in connection with
Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community
2
Redevelopment Project Area ("Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan"), is
hereby incorporated by reference and is designated as the official redevelopment
plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on February 4, 2010, by Resolution No. 10-01, the Planning
Commission of the City of Grand Terrace ("Planning Commission") has reported
that Amendment No. 6 conforms to the General Plan for the City of Grand
Terrace pursuant to CRL Sections 33346 and 33453; and
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2010, copies of the notice of joint public hearing, the
Preliminary Report (acting as the blight report required by CRL Section 33451.5)
and the Draft Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan were mailed by
certified mail with return receipt requested to the California Department of
Finance and the California Department of Housing and Community Development;
and
WHEREAS, to date, the Agency has not received comments regarding
Amendment No. 6 from the California Department of Finance or the California
Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to CRL Section
33451(e); and
WHEREAS, City staff held a community information meeting on March 9, 2010,
in the Community Meeting Room at Grand Terrace City Hall, for the purposes of
providing information and receiving input on the proposed Amendment No. 6;
and
WHEREAS, notice for the community information meeting was provided via
published notice in the Blue Mountain Outlook on March 1, 2010; and in the
Grand Terrace City News on March 4, 2010
WHEREAS, the City prepared and circulated a Draft Program Environmental
Impact Report on the City of Grand Terrace General Plan Update and
Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Revised Grand Terrace
Community Redevelopment Project, State Clearinghouse No. 2008011109
("Draft EIR") in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the Guidelines for Implementation of
the California Environmental Quality Act (14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15000 et
seq.) and the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to incorporate
comments received and responses thereto, and, as so revised and
supplemented, a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR") was prepared
and certified by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and
have determined that, for certain significant effects identified by the Final EIR,
mitigation measures and a mitigation monitoring program therefor have been
adopted and mitigation measures incorporated to avoid or substantially lessen
such effects; and
3
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the remaining significant effects identified by the Final EIR
which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing in the
City Council Chambers, 22975 Barton Rd, Grand Terrace, California, on April 27,
2010, to consider adoption of Amendment No. 6; and
WHEREAS, a notice of said hearing was duly and regularly published in the San
Bernardino Sun a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Grand Terrace,
once a week for 4 successive weeks on March 29, April 5, April 12, and April 19
2010, and a copy of said notice and affidavit of publication.are on file with the
City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2010, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were
mailed by first-class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each
parcel of land (as shown on the last equalized assessment roll of the County of
San Bernardino), residents and businesses in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2010, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were
mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested to the governing body of
each taxing entity that receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Report to City Council on
Amendment No. 6, the actions of the Planning Commission, Amended and
Restated Redevelopment Plan, the EIR, has provided an opportunity for all
persons to be heard and has received and considered all evidence and testimony
presented for or against any and all aspects of Amendment No. 6; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted written findings in response to the
written objections received, if any, from affected property owners and/or affected
taxing entities at or prior to the joint public hearing; and
WHEREAS, all actions required by law have been taken by all appropriate legal
bodies.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND
TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is
necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in Section 33367 of
the CRL.
2. Significant blight remains within the Project Area, which blight cannot be
eliminated without the establishment of additional debt and an increase in
the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the Agency. The
4
n
continued redevelopment of the Project Area is necessary to effectuate
the public purposes declared in the CRL. This finding is based on the
following facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report to City Council
on the Amendment No. 6:
a. The Project Area continues to suffer from a combination of physical
and economic blighting conditions, including, among others: a lack
of necessary commercial facilities, inadequate public
improvements, obsolete design or construction, and buildings in
which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work due to
- deterioration and dilapidation, and neighborhoods of higher crime
rates.
b. The estimated costs of the redevelopment actions needed to aid in
the elimination and correction of the remaining blighting conditions
in the Project Area far exceed the tax increment limit of the existing
Redevelopment Plan.
c. Other available governmental actions and resources are insufficient
to address all of the remaining blighting conditions and the costs
and risks to individual owners and developers are too great.
3. The plan effectiveness dates for both the Original and Added Areas.are
hereby amended to those allowed by CRL Sections 33333.6:
.v,
a. Original Area - September 27, 2022
b. Added Area - July 14, 2024
CRL Section 33333.6 also allows redevelopment agencies to collect tax
increment revenue for ten additional years beyond the effectiveness of a
redevelopment plan. With the extensions to the Plan effectiveness
described above, Amendment No. 6 hereby amends and establishes the
following dates as the time limits to collect tax increment revenue:
c. Original Area— September 27, 2032
d. Added Areas - , July 14, 2034
4. Amendment No. 6 will provide for the continued redevelopment of the
Project Area in conformity with the CRL and in the interests of the public
peace, health, safety and welfare. This finding is based upon the fact that
the purposes of the CRL will be attained by implementing the Amended
and Restated Redevelopment Plan to eliminate and correct the remaining
conditions of blight in the Project Area and prevent their reoccurrence
through the implementation of the Agency's on-going projects and
programs in conjunction with the programs and projects of other private
and public entities.
5
S
5. The adoption and carrying out of the Amended and Restated
Redevelopment Plan is economically sound and feasible. This finding is
based on the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report to City
Council: that under the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan, as
amended by Amendment No. 6, the Agency will continue to be authorized
and seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including
property tax increment revenues; that the nature and timing of public
redevelopment assistance within the Project Area will continue to depend
upon the amount and availability of such financing resources, including tax
increment generated by the Project Area; and that the proposed method of
financing included within the Report to the City Council demonstrates that
sufficient financial resources will be available to carry out the
implementation of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan.
6. Amendment No. 6 is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Grand
Terrace, including, but not limited to, the housing element, which
substantially complies with state housing law. This finding is based upon
the finding of the Planning Commission that Amendment No. 6 is
consistent with the General Plan of the City of Grand Terrace.
7. The carrying out of Amendment No. 6 would promote the public.peace,
health, safety and welfare of the City of Grand Terrace and will effectuate
the purposes and the policy of the CRL. This finding is based upon the
fact that Amendment No. 6 will provide the Agency with the financial and
administrative resources to fund programs and projects that will correct
conditions of blight, coordinate public and private actions to stimulate
development and improve the economic and physical conditions of the
Project Area, and increase employment and affordable housing
opportunities within the City.
8. The Agency has a feasible method for the relocation of families and
persons who might be displaced, temporarily or permanently, from
housing facilities in the Project Area. This finding is based on the fact that
the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan provides for relocation
assistance according to law. Amendment No. 6 rescinds the Agency's
eminent domain authority in the Project Area, previously set to expire on
August 22, 2011.
a. There are, or shall be provided, within the Project Area or within
other areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities
and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the
financial means of the families and persons displaced from the
Project Area, decent, safe and sanitary dwellings equal in number
to the number of and available to the displaced families and
persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment.
6
b. No person or family will be required to move from any dwelling unit
until suitable replacement housing is available. Families and
persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a relocation
plan, and dwelling units housing persons and families of low or
moderate income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the
adoption of a replacement housing plan.
9. The elimination of remaining blight and the redevelopment of the Project
Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private
enterprise acting alone, or by governmental action, or both, without the aid
and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the facts, as
more particularly set forth in the Report to the City Council on Amendment
No. 6, that because of significant risks associated with development of
blighted areas, individual property owners and developers are unable and
unwilling to invest or locate in the Project Area without public assistance
and that funds of other potentially available public sources and programs
are insufficient to eliminate the blighting conditions.
10.The increase in the tax increment limit contained in Amendment No. 6 is
reasonably related to the proposed projects and programs to be
implemented in the Project Area and the ability of the Agency to eliminate
significant remaining blighting conditions within the Project Area. This
finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report
= to the City Council on Amendment No. 6, that redevelopment actions
needed to aid in the elimination and correction of the remaining blighting
conditions in the Project Area are extensive and the increase in the tax
increment limit was based on the estimated costs, including financing and
related costs, of those necessary redevelopment actions.
11.The implementation of Amendment No. 6 will improve or alleviate the
physical and economic conditions of blight in the Project Area, as
described in the Report to the City Council on Amendment No. 6. This
finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report
to the City Council on Amendment No. 6, that redevelopment projects and
programs to be undertaken as a result of Amendment No. 6 are expected
to result in attracting necessary commercial facilities to the Project Area,
correct inadequate public improvements that have impeded development
opportunities, assist in the removal of obsolete structures, rehabilitate
deteriorated and dilapidated structures and address high crime rates.
12.The findings set forth in paragraphs (9), (10) and (12) of subdivision (d) of
Section 33367 of the CRL are not applicable to the approval and adoption
of Amendment No. 6 because Amendment No. 6 does not make any
changes to the size and shape of the Project Area and, consequently, as
7
7
provided in Section 33457.1 of the CRL, no findings with respect to such
matters are warranted or required.
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace
Grand Terrace and of the and of the City Council thereof
City Council thereof
I, BRENDA MESA, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on
, 2010 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Approved as to rm
John R. Harper, GWAttorney
8
4