Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 11 23 CC MIN1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeINDEX NOVEMBER 23, 1976 Invocation Councilman Hamilton City Council Received Notification of Special Meeting Public Hearing Report re Adoption of Redevelopment Plan for San Gabriel River Redevelopment Project and Adoption of Plan; Consider Approval of Draft E.I.R. Publications and Mailings Acting City Manager Sexton Acting City Attorney Ritchie James Pulllam, Putliam, Matthews & Associates Taylor Dark, Taylor Dark & Company James Pulliam Taylor Dark James Pulliam Clair Port, Port & Flor Relocation Consultants Taylor Dark James Pulliam Receive and File Planning Commission Reports James Garrow, Chairman Redevelopment Advisory Commission U.S. Pipe & Foundry No Objection Southern California Edison Request Deletion of 81 Acres Public Hearing Opened: Mrs. T. L. Balkus Letter) Henry Littlejohn Jackson R. Baker Fred Heitman, Brooks Products William P. Willman, Attorney for dare Schweitzer Dennis Irving, Owner, Baldwin Park Wreckers Cloy Hillman Meg Gilbert, L.A. County CAO Office Acting City Attorney Ritchie Acting City Manager Sexton Councilman Aguilar Acting City Attorney Ritchie Dixon Moisten, Deputy County Counsel James Garrow John Kunz Dorothy Mayes Tom Carpenter Bertha Regus Bob Izel Robert Oilman Bob Izell Jeannie Martin Dwaine Glass Joe Cate Lillian Zayas Letter) Jackson Baker Dorothy Mayes John Taylor Taylor Dark E. J. Gekas James Pulliam Tom Carpenter Acting City Attorney Ritchie Fred Heitman BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeIndex November 23, 1976 Page 2 Henry Litttejohn Acting City Attorney Ritchie Taylor Dark Councilman Blewett Ordinance No. 745, Approving and Adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the San Gabriel River Redevelopment Project Introduced Continue Public Hearing on Draft E.I.R. and Redevelopment Plan to November 30, 1976 Mayor Waldo re Sex Books and Magazines Mayor Waldo Became 111 10:35 P.M. Meeting Adjourned BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe000/309 i SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL MORGAN PARK COMMUNITY BUILDING 14255 East Ramona Boulevard AND AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park met in special session at the above place at 7:00 p.m. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Baldwin Park met in adjourned regular session at 14255 E. Ramona Boulevard at 7:00 p.m. Invocation was given by Councilman Hamilton. Councilman Kitchel led the salute to the flag. Roll Call: CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY DIRECTORS: Present: AGUILAR, BLEWETT, HAMILTON, KITCHEL AND MAYOR WALDO Also Present: ACTING CITY MANAGER SEXTON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CRA), ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE, PLANNING DIRECTOR KILGOUR, ASSISTANT PLANNER MONTOYA, CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Absent: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS LATHROP, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE HALLOWAY AND CHIEF OF POLICE CHELLINO 00- In answer to City Clerk Balkus's inquiry, the City Council stated they had alt received notif- ication of this Special Meeting. 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on considering a report concerning the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan for the San Gabriel River Redevelop- ment Project and the adoption of said Plan, and to consider the approval of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. Proper publications and mailings had been accomplished Acting City Manager Sexton stated that the purpose of this meeting was to consider the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the San Gabriel River Redevelopment Project. He introduced the consultants who were present and said they had conducted the studies necessary to completion of the reports to this point: James Pulliam of the firm of Pulliam, Matthews and Associates, architect and planner; Ctaire Port, of the relocation firm of Port and Ftor Relocation Consultants; Robert Oltman, environ- mental impact consultant; James Magner, and fiscal consultant; Taylor Dark, principal economist who prepared a market analysis and impact analysis of the project area. He said the Planning Commission and Redevelopment Advisory Commission had considered the Redevelopment Plan and the Environmental Impact Report and have recomnendations on both items. NOVEMBER 23, 1976 7:00 P.M. INVOCATION FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL C.C. REC'D NOTIFICATION OF SPEC. MTG. PUB. HEARING REPORT RE ADOPTION OF REDEV. PLAN FOR SAN GABRIEL RIVER REDEV. PROJ. & ADOPTION OF PLAN; CONSIDER APPROVAL OF DRAFT E.I.R. PUBLICATIONS & MAILINGS A.C.M. SEXTON BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe0007310 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Acting City Attorney Ritchie stated that he and the Staff and the Redevelopment Agency and City Council had been working on this project for some months, although the consultants had been preparing it only in the last six weeks. The Planning Commission and the Redevelopment Agency had approved and recommended the Plan and the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The Redevelopment Plan had been on file for some time, but the consultants had made some technical revisions which were embodied 1n the revised Plan and had been discussed by the Planning Commission and the Agency. The E.I.R. and Supplement had been fully discussed and had been on file for over 30 days and distributed by Taw. He referred to the Planning report, market study and economic impact report and other documentation which must be reviewed, along with the expert testimony and input by the public, in order for the City Council to make their decision. The purpose of the Public Hearing technically was for any person to show cause ft they deny there is blight in any of the project area or any irregularities in the prior proceedings so that the Plan should not be adopted. He said the law limits testimony in this Banner, although the Council may wish to allow anyone who had substantial testimony to speak. James Pull 1am, architect and planner from the firm of Pu111am> Matthews and Associates, stated he and other consultants had prepared the report relative to the Redevelopment Plan. He outlined the boundaries of the study area and said It contains approximately 263 acres, including 190 acres in the City of Baldwin Park and 73 in the City of Irwindate. The entire area was called the Study area, while the portion which lies in Baldwin Park was referred to as the Project Area. He summarized the report on the develop- ment, including description of physical conditions. Mr. Marshall assisted him with slides of panoramic views and freeway exposure, depicting bliqht and physical conditions such as vacant and under utilized land ahd land with various power easements transversing the Study and Project Area and maps of both areas. Taylor Dark, economist, stated that 35% of the parcels are held in acreage of 1 acre or less and 75% are 5 acres or less. With parcels this large, it is difficult for private enterprise or individuals to assemble a large parcel in a reasonable time and keep down costs. The area has not had major changes in assessed valuations since 1970, despite the fact Baldwin Park and 18 other cities have had substantial increases in the past 5 or 6 years. He said the amount of taxes generated within the project area to the City was $30,300 a year and compared it to the $90,000 in services rendered and said the area does not carry itself 1n terms of services provided. Mr. Pulliam referred to the physical conditions of the area and said that the redevelopment process, as set forth in the State Health and Safety Code, permitted increment increased taxing of new industrial and commercial facilities to be used to repay project costs and was the vehicle for all the actions necessary to reclaim this potentially productive land and to create the climate that would invite and encourage development. continued) November 23, 1976 Page 2 A.C.A. RITCHIE JAMES PULLIAM, PULLIAM. MATTHEWS & ASSOCIATES TAYLOR DARK, TAYLOR DARK & CO JAMES PULLIAM BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeOC07311 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 3 Mr. Dark summarized the market potential by listing the types of relocation activities that could be absorbed. He said the area is well located, but must be promoted and must have the necessary utilities. He referred to the 605 Raceway project and stated that if the project were to stand by itself without any joint venture with Irwindale, the absorption rate would be about 10 acres, white with a joint venture it would increase to about 15 acres a year. Mr. Pultiam referred to the pattern of land use proposed for the principal development site within the project area and said it is the intent of the Plan that this site be utilized for non-noxious industrial development compatible with those existing industrial activities that may be retained. Certain parcels may be used for supporting commercial facilities such as banks, shops, and restaurants. A11 or a portion of the existing small park on private land is proposed to be acquired and renewed as a public park serving industrial employees and residents of the neighborhood. The Department of Water and Power transmission easement and areas to the east and south, excepting the school and small residential pocket, are proposed to be used for land- scaping, agriculture, or restricted storage and warehousing compatible with adjacent existing residential development. With proper treatment, the transmission easement area could become a landscaped pedestrian walkway leading from industrial facilities to commercial, public recreation or residential sites. The school site is proposed to be retained in its present use. If and when the Baldwin Park School Board should determine the school to be surplus and no longer necessary for educational purposes, the Agency should assist the School Board in putting the site to a productive and compatible use. A. landlocked parcel of single family residential property is included within the project boundaries and the Agency should propose to assist, through the redevelopment process, in providing access to, and subdividing of this property. The Agency should receive and review applications for proposed private industrial developments and before approval, the Agency should establish necessary additional controls to regulate the proposed activity. He listed street improvements proposed to provide improved access to development sites within the study area» including Rivergrade Road, Live Oak Avenue, Merced Avenue, Olive Street and Stewart Avenue which will be dosed from Cragmont North.' He referred to the Environmental Impact Report prepared by Robert L. Oilman and Associates and Ervin Engineering. Environmental assessment of each user and phase of the project will be conducted to insure that the development is within environ- mental standards set forth in the report. He stated the proposed redevelopment of the project area conforms to the General Plan The major goals for industrial areas are to create jobs and revenue for the community and to improve appearance. He listed the compelling reasons for applying the redevelopment process to the entire study area as a combined project or a single undertaking to be carried out by joint action of the two jurisdictions of Baldwin Park and Irwindale. He stated the specific advantages that would accrue from a confcined program of redevelopment. He said continued) TAYLOR DARK JAMES PULLIAM BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe000731^ Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 4 that it Is recommended that redevelopment of the entire project area take place as a single proqram under both jurisdictions. He stated the consultants had held preliminary discussions with Irwindale City officials who were receptive to the concept and agreeable to more detailed discussions later. He referred to the uniform quality of development control relative to use of land as set forth in his report. He discussed the redevelopment actions necessary to Implement the Plan as set forth in the Redevelopment Laws in the California State Health and Safety Code and summarized the various Redevelopment actions. Claire Port, principal in the relocation firm of Port and Flor Relocation Consultants, stated there is one residential unit within the project boundaries but that no residential displacement is anticipated and minimum business relocation. She said that anyone being required to move would receive assistance and re- location benefits as prescribed by State Law and under the rules and regulations adopted by the City of Baldwin Park. He referred to the type of action contemplated to provide assistance to the present owners of existing buildings relative to the re- habilitation or demolition or removal of buildings, the installation, construction, reconstruction or removal of streets, utilities and other public Improvements, and sale and disposition of private and public land, design review and bond sales. Taylor Dark stated that the method used for financing the plan is tax incremental revenue procedure. The over-all cost of development is anticipated to be roughly $5 Million and includes streets, utilities, relocation, administration and financing. He said that when the property becomes developed to its potential, the private investment could attain $30 Million as a result of the $5 Million investment by the City through CRA. The future potential investment is about $5 private investment for every $1 of public investment. He quoted the increase in assessed valuation In its ultimate development and increase in tax revenue. He referred to the tax flows to various agencies as listed in the analysis. The tax flow will remain about the same for Agencies with the exception of Baldwin Park as a local area and that would increase to about $9000 as a result of the tax incremental process. The difference between existing revenue in assessed base and new assessed base will enable a bonding capacity between $8 and $8.5 Million. This exceeds the project cost of $3 Million. This demonstrates it is financially feasible and it could generate a sizeable tax revenue. He cited employment figures set forth in the analysis. Mr. Pulliam stated that the City Council had received an updated report on the Redevlopment Plan which outlined and incorporated the revisions made in the past 3 weeks. He stated there had been no changes in recommended boundaries, in concept or change in control established for use of land. Section V. F and G had been added. Continued) CLAIRE PORT, PORT & FLOR RELOCATION CONSULTANTS TAYLOR DARK JAMES PULL I AM BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeOOG7313 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Acting City Manager Sexton stated that $126,816 had been received from the Los Angeles County Auditor/Controller Accounting Division for tax increments generated since the Puente/Merced Redevelopment Project was adopted. This money repaid a loan the City had undertaken for the studies of that project and the surplus will be applied to the present project. Assistant Planner Montoya stated that all the reports required by State law had been submitted by the Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency to the Planning Commission for their review. The Plan- ning Commission reviewed the revised Redevelop- ment Plan and additions made to the initial documents and found that revisions were consistent with the original material presented to the Planning Commission, as approved in Rfesolution 76-55 and 76-54. These changes were compatible with the General Plan and Resolution No. 76-56 was approved, noting this action. The Planning Commission reviewed the Environmental Impact Report and found it had met the requirements of the State law and the California Environmental Quality Act and approved Resolution No. 76-57. RECEIVE AND FILE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS AND MAKE THEM PART OF THE RECORD. M/S/C: BLEWETT/AGUILAR. There were no objections. 00- James Garrow, Chairman of the Community Redevelop- ment Advisory Commission, stated the Commission had studied copies of the first draft of the proposed San Gabriel River Project and had held meetings and unanimously recommended to the City Council that the project be adopted. 00- Acting City Attorney Ritchie stated that two written cormiuni cations had been received. United States Pipe and Foundry Company had indicated certain understandings about their relationship to the project and don't intend to object to the adoption of the Plan. Southern California Edison Company indicated that 43.6 acres out of 44.4 acres of their Rio Hondo Substation are in the City of Irwindate with 81 acres in the City of Baldwin Park. They request the exclusion of that parcel from the project. Copies in official files) He said the request of Southern California Edison Company should be resolved before taking action on the Plan. 00- Mayor Waldo opened the Public Hearing on the Environmental Impact Report and the Redevelopment Plan. He said property owners would speak first, followed by Interested citizens and questions to the experts. November 23, 1976 Page 5 RECEIVE AND FILE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS JAMES GARROW. CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMISSION US PIPE & FOUNDRY NO OBJECTION SO. CALIF. EDISON REQUEST DELETION OF 81 ACRES PUBLIC HEARING OPENED continued) BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe000^314 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mrs. T. L. Batkus, 4625 North Marian, letter submitted and read in full by City Clerk, object- ing to the project as Plan would landtock Parcel 9 and property can only develop when development takes place. Copy in official files). Henry Littlejohn, 4225 Jerry, confirmed with Mr. Pulliam that utilities are available on his property on Los Angeles Street but had not been developed. He recommended that consideration be given to putting In a street along the Edison right-of- way to open up landlocked parcels and control traffic from Los Angeles Street; and keep the industrial section segregated from the residential section. He suggested the same at Merced instead of going all the way up from Merced on the right- of-way, go up Merced and open up the lots to make ingress to Arrow Highway. You must have ingress and egress to industrial areas for trucks. He felt cul-de-sacs were ridiculous. Jackson R. Baker. Oroville, Calif., owner of Lot 10, was opposed to his property being included for the use of CRA. He stated he had not received a copy of the reports until last night and had no time to study. He asked that this be accepted as his legal objection and reserved the right to protest. Fred Heitman, representing Brooks Products, 13205 Los Angeles St., stated his company favored the general principle of CRA and listed the positive factors of the proposed development. He listed shortcomings that should be looked at before approval of the proposed plan: Determine the need, general condition, geographical trend of people going to industrial parks, etc. What is the vacancy factor; What has the history of industrial parks been; have they been successful? Wilt the product sell? He questioned the responsibility to be borne by City of Irwindale referred to 605 Speedway area in the CRA area but in the City of Irwindate) and stated his Company felt that without this property being committed as part of the project so it could be rehabilitated, this could not be a viable project as the 605 Speedway separates the total. He asked what is the cost to the City? He referred to police, fire and other city maintenance items as costs to be borne by the City taxpayers and not by the CRA. He asked what happens to the project if it isn't successful; it could be an expensive white elephant. He questioned tax effect on residents and businesses and how badly would a failure effect the City's reputation and what effect would it have on future developments in terms of bonding, borrowing power or CRA borrowing power. He said Brooks Products have certain reservations. They are currently in M-2 zone; a November 8th revision changed to M-1 zoning and tonight's Nov. 23) 5 o'clock edition referred to it as M-1 light zoning. Brooks Products wished to voice a reservation on this zoning. He said they were being asked to voice an opinion without yet reading all the Plan. He strongly urged that certain important matters be investigated before approval of the Plan and that reservations such as on zoning be recorded. Continued) November 23. 1976 Page 6 MRS. T. L. BALKUS HENRY LITTLEJOHN JACKSON R. BAKER FRED HEITMAN, BROOKS PRODUCTS BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎX pe0007315 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency He said the official position 1s that Brooks will abide by whatever decision is made by the Council, if things are presented to them. William P. Willman, 14350 Mulholland Dr.. L.A., attorney representing Mr. dare Schweitzer, owner of Lots 21, 22 and 23, stated sympathy with the redevelopment project, but reserved the right to express approval or disapproval at a second hearing after reading the Plan further. Acting City Attorney Ritchie stated that only one Public Hearing is required and that there is no plan for a Public Hearing at the time of the second reading of the Ordinance, if it was introduced tonight. He said that this was the time to express opinions regarding blight or whether the proceedings had been conducted regularly. Councilman Blewett asked whether the law prohibits a second Public Hearing. Acting City Attorney Ritchie said that the law just stales a Public Hearing will be held, but that the Ordinance could be introduced tonight and the Public Hearing could be continued and the Ordinance adopted at that time. Mr. Sexton said that Mr. Witlman and Mr. Schweitzer wilt be advised of a Public Hearing so that comment may be made subsequent to it. Mr. wniman said they would want to reserve this right to make comnent, as they did not wish to comnnt themselves to opposing it. Dennis Irvlng. 5056 Merced, owner of Baldwin.Park Wreckers, stated he was totally in opposition to the CRA as presented. E. J. Gekas, 15 North First Avenue. Arcadia, attorney for Ruth Havenar, individually, and Ruth Havenar and Eva Cantrall as trustees of Cantrall Trust, said the Cantrall Interest are owners of part of the property upon which Brooks Products is located and part of the adjoining property. AH of this property is designated as a conforming use. He stated there was quite a bit to digest at one time in order to pose an.objection or to support the Plan. He said if a decision had to be made tonight, their objection would be to the insufficiency of the E.I.R. report, a contrary finding that this is a blighted area, particularly the Cantrall interest property, and because of revisions which are being made. He requested that the Public Hearing be continued. Cloy Hillman, 5049 Landis Ave.. suggested that the approval of the Redevelopment Plan and E.I.R. Report be decided by the Mayor and City Council. Meg Gilbert, representing the County Chief Administrative Office, voiced objection to the project and said the County had not received a copy of the Plan until 3 p.m. the day before and have never received a copy of the Environmental Impact Report. She stated the County Continued) November 23, 1976 Page 7 WILLIAM P. WILLMAN, ATTORNEY FOR CLARE SCHWEITZER DENNIS IRVING, OWNER BALDWIN PARK WRECKERS E. J. BEKAS FOR HAVENAR AND CANTRALL CLOY HILLMAN MEG GILBERT. LOS ANGELES COUNTY CAO OFFICE BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎX pe0007316 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 8 had a policy of reviewing a11 the CRA projects proposed out of the County and then file them with the Board of Supervisors so that they may take a position. She said the Board had authorized the appearance of herself and Dixon Holsten, representing County Counsel, to oppose the project because the information was not available and to oppose it on the guidelines previously established by the Board of Supervisors. She stated they had not found substantial evidence that there was any detrimental effect on public health or welfare within the community but stated there would be a severe fiscal impact upon the County if the project proceeds. She had interpreted the Plan as stating there would be a $1 Million tax increment per year and expressed concern that Mr. Dark had indicated it could be $5 Million. The County tax rate in Baldwin Park represents 31 or 32% of the over-all tax rate and if the project proceeds and takes $35 Million in tax increments, the County would lose over $11 Million. CRA projects are diverting a substantial amount of revenue funds from the County and result in tax rate increases. She said that there was no discussion in the Plan regarding the finding that there were no other reasonable means of financing anticipated public improvements. She requested that the County be informed more than 24 hours prior to making that finding so that it can be evaluated. Acting City Attorney Ritchie clarified that the Plan had been in the process of being developed for some time and that the City Clerk had sent a notice of availability to the County, summarizing what was in it. The Environmental Impact Report had been sent to SCAG and distributed to all taxing agencies concerned. He said there must have been County Employees available to come get a copy and that the law does not require that a copy be sent to the Counjty only to notify them that the Plan was in preparation. Mr. Sexton said that Ms. Gilbert had been told that the revised Plan was not available until last Friday. Ms. Gilbert said the Plan was again revised on November 22. Councilman Aguilar said that Baldwin Park paid for the services it received from the County and asked if the City of Baldwin Park had to be totd by the County what it could do for the City of Baldwin Park. He suggested that the County not cut down on services to Baldwin Park but rather cut down on their personal employees in order to save money. Acting City Attorney Ritchie stated that there was no good cause to consider the County's request, based upon their past efforts to be of help to Baldwin Park or their alleged inability to obtain a copy of the Report. He recommended that their request be denied. Dixon Holsten, Deputy County Counsel, said there were approximately 20 such projects being jammed through in the last few weeks of 1976 to try to avoid the Montoya reform legislations. He said the notices received were insufficient to analyze the Plan and make intelligent evaluation. He presented objections to the Plan, stated a recent California Supreme Court decision and said the type of showing involved in that case had not been shown here. He said it had not been Continued) ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE ACTING CITY MANAGER SEXTON COUNCILMAN AGUILAR ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE DIXON HOLSTEN, DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎX peSpecial Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency 000^31^ November 23, 1976 Page 9 shown that the land is a real hindrance to the develop- ment of the City and cannot be improved without public assistance. He referred to the cost of the Plan and did not think the full $35. Million tax increment would be spent, as the first few years the tax increment would not be $1 Million, but if it were anywhere near the figure, $150,000 to $250,000 per acre would be spent for development of the land. He referred to the comparison of the per capita sales and use tax figures with other cities and said that with one exception they are alt cities who have one or more redevelopment projects operating with shopping centers generating the sales and use tax figure. He said that Section 33445 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Senate Bill 3672, provides that for projects after October 1, and if any acquisition and construction of public improvements occurred, are provided for in the Plan, the improvements must be specifically set forth in the Plan and show that there is no other reasonable method of financing them. He said this kind of project will have an adverse impact upon the City itself and taxes will go up and there has not been the tax benefit to the citizens. He said the County's prime objection was that of blight and that they have not had time to look at the Plan and to analyze it. Mr. Ritchie asked if the County would be able to make some response if the City Council decided to continue the Public Hearing to November 29, 1976. Mr. Holsten said the Board of Supervisors doesn't meet until November 30th, but that he would attempt to give any subsequent information to the Board of Supervisors. James Garrow, 1011 North Baldwin Park Boulevard. said last year the San Gabriel Valley received from the County only 14% of the money spent for major projects. He said redevelopment projects do not run for 35 years, usually about 11 years. The project had to stand to the bond holder and there had never been a default in any of the CRA bonds In the State. They are all AAA. He referred to the blighted properties and stated that Baldwin Park needs some of the tax money that surrounding cities are receiving from their developments. John Kunz, 13904 Mas line, took exception to the representative from the County Chief Administrative Office for objecting to Baldwin Park's Plan and saying it wilt create a severe fiscal impact upon the County when the other cities have all received County money. i Dorothy Mayes, 3453 Big Datton. recommended the schedule be abandoned and the decision postponed until January 1, for the new law providing more protection for taxpayers and clearer definition of blighted areas. Tom Carpenter, 4346 Jerry St., Chairman of the League to Preserve Constitutional and Civil Rights, opposed and protested the adoption of the Project and the inclusion in the Plan of land which was not blighted. He stated County. School and City taxes wilt be siphoned off by the Redevelopment Agency without benefit of redevelopment. Continued) JAMES GARROW JOHN KUNZ DOROTHY MAYES TOM CARPENTER BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎX 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎX pe0007319 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park C-ity Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 11 Mr. Sexton said CRA wi11 pay fair market value for property. Dorothy Mayes» 3453 North Big Dalton, referred to some of the trash mentioned and asked if anything had been done about this by the Enforcement Officer hired to handle public nuisances. Mr. Sexton said the property maintenance employees were assigned to inspecting housing areas rather than industrial areas. John Taytor, 14242 Ohio, asked what impact the redevelopment project will have upon the school district taxes? Taylor Dark, economist, stated he had verified with the School Board that school district enrollment was declining in Baldwin Park. He said the existing tax base remains and is not taken away from the School Board and they will be able to tax the way they have all along. If the base remains the same and the School has to increase its service, the taxes go up, but the enrollment has been declining instead. He said the schools have the same tax base before or after any project is developed. E. J. Gekas, 15 North First Avenue, representing Mrs. Havenar and Mrs. Cantrati, asked if it had already been determined that their property was a conforming use if the'Plan was adopted? Mr. Sexton said it was on the map and on the Plan. Mr. Gekas suggested it be incorporated in the Plan. Mr. Ritchie said it is a conforming use and couldn't be anything else without amending the Plan and when the plan is adopted there wi11 be-a more detailed agreement. Mr. Gekas referred to the Permitted Uses, Page 29 Revised Draft of th'e Report, and to the word tight" being added to M-1 Zone. He asked the reason for the addition of the word. Mr. Pultiam said under the existing Zoning Ordinance, the M-1 zoning permits uses presently contained in the areas referred to as conforming use. He confirmed he had not intended to dilute the M-1 zoninq classifi- cation by adding the word light." Tom Carpenter, 4346 Jerry, asked what benefit the conforming use properties get from the CRA other than an agreement that they won't be touched during the bonding life. Mr. Ritchie said that there is going to be an attempt to provide screening, landscaping, street improvements and a coordinated program between Baldwin Park and Irwindale, which can only be brought about by redevelop- ment agencies. This would benefit the properties by placing Improvements on or adjacent to their property, and by providing an entrance to the area so that they in turn can develop their property more intensely. This wi11 raise the value of their property and make it more usable. Continued) DOROTHY MAYES JOHN TAYLOR TAYLOR DARK E. J. GEKAS JAMES PULLIAM TOM CARPENTER ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe0007320 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 12 Mr. Carpenter asked what was in the Plan to prevent the property owners from being relocated. He said he assumed they would be given an agreement that they would not be relocated during the bonding life so they would be secure. Mr. Ritchie said there was nothing in the Redevelopment Act that says that the property owners must be given benefits in their Plans. Redevelopment means taking areas and getting rid of the conditions that are preventing it from being productive and producing enough tax revenue to pay its own way. There wilt always be some usages within a project area. Some will be somewhat productive and others that are not productive at alt. He said you can't make a Plan work for a whole area; you can't do coordinated plan- ning with the City of Irwindale for an entire area unless you have some degree of control over that area. One of the things the Agency would have the power to do in that area as the City might have the power to do to a limited extent), is development controls. They can require the further development of those sites which are presently used and are conforming to be developed to some reasonable standard that will make them compatible with the rest of the community. We can't make them go in there with a lot of expensive things but we can require them for future development to meet some of these demands. These are tools that are available to Redevelopment which are not readily available to a City and which could not be funded by the City alone. The benefit does not have to be to the individual property owner. It is supposed to be a benefit to the community. Mr. Carpenter said that these properties don't really belong in this area. He said that Mr. Ritchie had pointed out the other evening that the City fathers here could eliminate them or leave them in. Mr. Ritchie said he had not said that. Mr. Carpenter said it was implied at the Planning Commission meeting by someone making a presentation that they wanted to make it clear whether they would be in or out. Mr. Ritchie said he would like to lay that one to rest, too. He said the area that Mr. Carpenter was talking about had some development on it. The evaluation of that will be frozen and will continue to be available to other taxing agencies. He said there is no magic going to happen to those areas where they might be ripping off" some tax benefits because there isn't going to be that much increment increase in those properties. They already have development on them. There is no great inducement for the Redevelolbment Agency to leave those properties in for tax revenue purposes. He said if a redevelop- ment project were being designed around a shopping center that was starting to be constructed so that 90% or 100% of its new value could be frozen and would be unavailable to the other taxing agencies and the benefit would be from alt that tax increment from that development, then the argument might be that all that tax increment could be ripped off." Continued) BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeSpecial Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency 000^321 November 23, 1976 Page 13 He stated that the increase on a facility that is already there 1n a relatively stagnant area was going to be miniscule. Mr. Carpenter said taxes are going up every year and with the value frozen, alt the increases that would accrue and every improvement put in would bear additional tax increments that are coming back, but if there aren't any, the purpose is defeated. He asked if there weren't any, how can these things be paid for, unless there are tax increments coming back in order to do it? Mr. Ritchie said therein lay the dispute. The County of Los Angeles had the theory that they just sit back and do nothing in cities such as Baldwin Park and if they can kill CRA efforts to make those cities better, and to prevent these cities from freezing any part of the increment, they are going to get these piddling increases that come along every few years of 5% or 10X increases in the assessment roll and the tax revenue from that. The County can count on that, even though the properties remain stagnant, unproductive and vacant. The responsiblity for making those areas productive enough so that the community can be prosperous lies with the City. The County of Los Angeles doesn't spend dime one to develop areas of Baldwin Park that are undeveloped and don't care whether they are developed. Including those areas in the redevelopment is so that the Plan itself can make the area productive. It is not to get any tax benefit out of that piece of property that is there, because you are not getting it. Mr. Carpenter said he had calculated possibly $100 Million coming out of County taxes going back at the rate of $2.4 Million and you can see how much of tax money is being ripped off." He said his calculations could be a little off, but that he had gotten the amount of money off the City tax bills. Mr. Sexton said reports have been received that the taxpayers of Baldwin Park pay about $13 Million a year to the County and receive back about $1 Million in services and cash values. Fred Heitman, 13205 Los Angeles Street, asked for clarification on rights of a conforming use. Mr. Ritchie said the Plan had made an effort to demon- strate that Brooks Products conformed to the Plan, and that that means if it conforms to the General Plan, it conforms to the zoning of the City. He stated that the assurance is in the Plan that they are a conforming use and that the City will be wilting to negotiate for their benefit a participation agreement so that they have all the rights they think then arfr entitled to as a conforming user. Mr. Heitman asked why they would need any contract or participating agreement if they are already a conforming use? Mr. Ritchie referred to subsequent land transfers and said he had suggested that it might be to the interest of the property owner, if he was concerned in subsequently selling his property or his business, to have something more than just a designation on a map or the Plan, Continued) FRED HEITMAN BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeCCC?322 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 14 He said people have come to him and said that a Title Company has picked up on that they are in a Redevelopment project area and they are worried about their sate and need something in writing to convince people that there is no problem. He said it had been routine with the Agencies that he represented to provide them with a written agreement explaining that they do conform and may continue to operate that use on the property. It is for the property owner's benefit. Henry Littlejohn, 4225 North Jerry, objected to Baldwin Park being called a poor city and to the treatment of the County representative from the Chief Administrative Office. He said he and other property owners should have been contacted about what they wanted to do with their property. He referred to U.S. Concrete Pipe Company's storage yard and asked how that valuable land could be a conforming use. He said he felt that would be losing good revenue for the City. He stated he reserved his thoughts whether he was for or against the redevelopment. Acting City Attorney Ritchie said that the County representatives and others with considerable interest in the Plan have complained they hadn't had sufficient time to respond to the Plan. He recommended that action be postponed on the Resolution regarding approving the Plan" but that the Ordinance be introduced to adopt the Plan at tonight's meeting and the Public Hearing be continued until November 30, 1976. Mr. Dark said he would submit a tetter responding to the points heard tonight, as he would not be able to attend the continued Public Hearing. He stated the County Exposition Fund of $175,000 runs the County Fairground and the Exploitation Fund which is designed for the economic development of the entire County is budgeted at only $217.453 for 1976 and 1977. The County tax base 1s $25,627,118,091 of assessed valuation. He said the redevelopment project is billed out at the ultimate of $627,118.000 possible and that the captured increment of 0.0002% will not be a threat to their tax base. He referred to the new County law which requested a CRA limitation on incremental financing and said his $1 Million annual budget limitation was written to conform with that. He stated the $1 Million limit has only to do with the financing for 10 to 12 years and does not apply to 35 years. Councilman Btewett requested that the following questions be answered before he voted: 1. Do we have a market for our product? How are other industrial parks in this area faring? What is the actual need for our product?; 2. What is the relationship between Baldwin Park and the Irwindale piece of property?; 3. What wilt the costs of services be to the City for development?; 4. What were the correct figures for the past 5 years for school district enrollment? He referred to the U.S. Concrete Pipe Company's parking lot and asked how it could be in the best interests of Baldwin Park to have it remain a conforming use. He said he wanted it further explored why it shouldn't be developed, as Baldwin Park cannot be getting much revenue from it. He requested that response to these questions be put in writing and presented to the Council. Continued) HENRY LITTLEJOHN ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE TAYLOR DARK COUNCILMAN BLEWETT BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe000^323 Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency City Clerk Balkus read by title: ORDINANCE NO. 745. APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SAN GABRIEL RIVER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 745. M/S/C: HAMILTON/AGUILAR. Roll Call. There were no objections INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 745. M/S/C: HAMILTON/AGUILAR. Roil Call. There were no objections. 00- CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO NOVEMBER 30, 1976, AT 8:00 P.M. M/S/C: BLEWETT/AGUILAR. There were no objections. 00- Mayor Waldo referred to sex books and magazines sold in stores and asked the Acting City Attorney what kind of action could be taken to force the stores to put them behind the counter for sale to adults only. Mayor Waldo became i11 at this point.) 00- AT 10:35 P.M. THE MEETING ADJOURNED. M/S/C: HAMILTON/ AGUILAR. There were no objections. 00- November 23. 1976 Page 15 ORDINANCE NO. 745, APPROVING & ADOPTING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SAN GABRIEL RIVER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ORD. NO. 745 WAIVE FURTHER READING ORD. NO. 745 INTRODUCED CONT. PUB. HEARING ON DRAFT E.I.R. AND REDEVEL. PLAN TO 11/30/76 MAYOR WALDO 10:35 P.M. MEETING ADJOURNED m^—— HELMA BALKUS, CITY CLERK APPROVED: L2^^^^ /6 1976 Date of Distribution to City Council: December 10, 1976 Date of Distribution to Departments: December 10, 1976 BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpe SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL MORGAN PARK COMMUNITY BUILDING 14255 East Ramona Boulevard AND AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park met in special session at the above place at 7:00 p.m The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Baldwin Park met in adjourned regular session at 14255 E. Ramona Blvd. at 7:00 p.m. Invocation was given by Councilman Hamilton. Councilman Kitchel led the salute to the flag. CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY DIRECTORS: Roll Call: Present: AGUILAR, BLEWETT, HAMILTON, KITCHEL AND MAYOR WALDO NOVEMBER 23, 1976 7:00 P.M. INVOCATION FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL Also Present: Absent: ACTING CITY MANAGER SEXTON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CRA), ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE, PLANNING DIRECTOR KILGOUR, ASSISTANT PLANNER MONTOYA, CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO AND CITY CLERK BALKUS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS LATHROP, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE HALLOWAY AND CHIEF OF POLICE CHELLINO 00- AT 10:35 P.M.COUNCILMAN BLEWETT MOVED. COUNCILMAN AGUILAR SECONDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1976, AT 8:00 P.M. There were no objections. 00- ADJOURNED 10:35 P.M TO TUES., NOV. 30, 1976 AT 8:00 P.M. DATED: NOVEMBER 24, 1976 TIME: 10:00 A.M. BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeAFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS: CITY OF BALDWIN PARK THELMA L. BALKUS, being first duty sworn, says and deposes: that I am the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park; that at a Special Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park held November 23 19 76 said meeting was ordered adjourned to the time and place specified in the Notice of the Adjournment ATTACHED HERETO: that on November 24 1976 at the hour of 10:00 a.m,. I posted a copy of said Notice at a conspicuous place on or near the door of the place at which said meeting of November 23 1976 was held. 0^7^^^ fflELMA L. BALKUS, TV CLERK Subscribed and sworn to before me this St^r day of MAY 1977. Hiiiiniiniiiiiiiimiiiiiii)iin;imiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiH OFFICIAL SEAL Janet C. De Long NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA:: PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY 5 E My Commission Expires Jan, 27, 1981 Tiiiiiifiii)i)*4iijiiuihiiiiiiiiHfiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin7i Safe^ Mti \ PubHc and State BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1976 11 23 CC MIN(ÌìÎXpeSPECIAL MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL MORGAN PARK COMMUNITY BUILDING 14255 East Ramona Boulevard AND AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 23. 1976 7:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park met In special session at 14255 East Ramona Boulevard at 7:00 p.m. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Baldwin Park met in adjourned regular session at 14255 East Ramona Boulevard at 7:00 p.m. Invocation was given by Councilman Hamilton. Councilman Kitchel led the salute to the flag. Roll Ca11: CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY DIRECTORS; Present: AGUILAR, BLEWETT, HAMILTON KITCHEL AND MAYOR WALDO Also Present: ACTING CITY MANAGER SEXTON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CRA), ACTING CITY ATTORNEY RITCHIE, PLANNING DIRECTOR KILGOUR, ASSISTANT PLANNER MONTOYA, CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Absent: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS LATHROP. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE HALLOWAY AND CHIEF OF POLICE CHELLINO 00- CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING INVOCATION FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Joint Public Hearing, pursuant to the provisions of the Community Redevelopment Act, Section 33000 et seq. of the Health & Safety Code of the State of California), to consider a Report concerning the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan for the San Gabriel River Redevelopment Project, and the adoption of said Plan and Adoption of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. 00- AT 10:35 P.M. COUNCILMAN BLEWETT MOVED. COUNCILMAN AGUILAR SECONDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, ADJOURN TO TUESDAY. NOVEMBER 30. 1976, AT 8:00 P.M. There were no objections. ADJOURNED 10:35 P.M. TO TUESDAY, NOV. 30, 1976 DATED: November 24, 1976 TIME: 10:00 A.M. 00- 1^^ TS^A-^ THELMA L. BALKUS, CITY CLERK———— BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 peQoo^auB Special Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevlopment Agency November 23, 1976 Page 10 He protested secrecy in withholding reports. Plans, and Draft Environmental Impact Report until within a few hours before public hearings and depriving voters and property owners of the knowledge of the Agency's inten- tions. He demanded that no action be taken on the Project until his objections were eliminated or corrected. He said that the $126,000 received in tax increments from the Puente/Merced Redevelopment Project will not cover all the CRA expenses that have been charged to the City. Bertha Regus, 5013 Cutler Street, opposed the approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Project. She referred to the tax increment money received back from the County as being the residents' tax dollars that the County had to return and said the experts working on this proposed plan were being paid with taxpayer's dollars. She said the majority of the people do not want their property taxes ripped off" by community redevelopment. She requested that the Public Hearing be continued. Bob Izell, 4801 Walnut Street, apologized to Meg Gilbert, the County representative, for the people of Baldwin Park for her treatment here tonight. He asked what an Environ- mental Impact Report was supposed to show. Robert Oilman, consultant, explained that the E.I.R. basically addressed itself to the facts of the conditions that exist now and the conditions that are being proposed. Mr. Izetl referred to slides that had been shown and said if the E.I.R. reflected conditions in the same way as the pictures, the report was biased. Jeannie Martin, 14621 Channing, thanked the City Council for fighting for the City and stated she was proud.of their efforts toward redevelopment. Dwaine Glass, 14345 Garvey, stated that the City Council had done a good job in their efforts toward redevelopment and that he thought they should go ahead with CRA plans. He said the County wants the taxpayer's money and doesn't want them to have it to spend the way they want to in the City. He said the tax increments the City will receive wilt be from the Improvements resulting from the redevelopment efforts. Joe Cate, 3043 North Maine, was in favor of community redevelopment, and felt that the County and Individuals WHO were not property owners in the proposed redevelop- ment area should not oppose the efforts to make improve- ments. City Clerk Batkus read in full a letter from Lillian Zayai, 12815 Finchley Street, protesting the approval and adoption of the San Gabriel River Project and the Plan. Letter in official files.) Jackson Baker, Orovitle, referred to slides depicting trash on properties that he said had been there since 1941 and the pictures of improvements. He asked if CRA had developed all this? He said CRA wilt come in and take their property whether the property owners like it or not. Continued) BERTHA REGUS BOB IZELL ROBERT OLTMAN BOB IZELL JEANNIE MARTIN DWAINE GLASS JOE CALE LILLIAN ZAYAS JACKSON BAKER BIB] 37658-U01 1976-U02 11-U02 23-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9725-U03 DO9783-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/5/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06