CDC - Minutes 03-26-024
INt~I' OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED
BY THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2002
The regular meeting of the Rosemead Community Development Commission was called to order
by Vice-Chairman Bruesch at 7:14 p.m. in the conference room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge and Invocation were waived as having been completed during the meeting
just adjourned.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Commissioners Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Vice-Chairman Bruesch
Absent: Chairman Imperial - excused
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12,
2002 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
VASQUEZ that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on February
12, 2002, be approved as submitted. Vote resulted:
Aye:
Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch
No:
None
Absent:
Imperial
Abstain:
None
The Vice-Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 26,
2002 - REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CLARK
that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on February 26, 2002, be
approved as submitted. Vote resulted:
Aye:
Clark, Taylor, Vasquez, Bruesch
No:
None
Absent:
Imperial
Abstain:
None
The Vice-Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CDCMMUrES:3-26-02
Page # I
4
1. CDC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-OICLAIMS AND DEMANDS
The following Resolution was presented to the Agency for adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-01 CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $357,387.74 AND DEMANDS NO. 6648
THROUGH 6665
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CLARK, SECOND BY COMMISIONER VASQUEZ
that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 2002-01. Vote resulted:
Aye:
Clark, Vasquez, Taylor, Bruesch
No:
None
Absent:
Imperial
Abstain:
None
The Vice-Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
2. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING
AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF A PARCEL OF REAL
PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AT 4106 TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD,
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8577-009-027)
Frank Tripepi, Executive Director, presented the staff report and stated that the property
owners indicated that they are willing to sell, but the issue is the price offered.
The Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing for those in the audience wishing to speak
on this item.
Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar, Rosemead, reminded the Commissioners that two of them
ran for office to protect property rights. Mr. Nunez stated that condemnation does not protect
property rights.
Mr. Tripepi stated that the property owner has filed a law suit against the City to force the
City to acquire the land, and that the Court will decide what the property is worth.
Gil Aguirre, 476 Cannon Avenue, San Dimas, clarified that by condemning the property,
that allows the Commission to argue the price to pay for the property in the Courts. Mr. Aguirre
asked what events have transpired to result in negotiating to purchase this property.
CDCMINUTES:3-26-02
Page #2
Peter Wallin, Commission Attorney, replied that the property owners have asked the City
to acquire the property and have filed an inverse condemnation lawsuit against the City. Mr.
Wallin continued that under the Redevelopment Law, if a property owner requests the
Commission to acquire their property, the Commission has to commence an eminent domain
action or make it acquisition exempt within 18 months.
Mr. Aguirre asked why have the property owners filed this lawsuit?
Vice-Chairman Bruesch explained that a developer, without City approval, notified the
property owners around Valley and Temple City Boulevards that he was going to develop that
site. The developer convinced the property owners that he was going to buy up the properties
and then develop that area. Some of the businesses decided to relocate elsewhere. Mr. Bruesch
stressed again that the City was not involved with the developer's project at that time.
Commissioner Taylor requested an explanation of the "necessity" of acquisition.
Mr. Wallin explained that a determination was made when the Redevelopment Plan was
adopted that it would be necessary to assemble some parcels. The parcel tonight is not needed at
this time, but ultimately it will be necessary for assemblage. Mr. Wallin continued that the
Commission is being asked to proceed because the property owner has filed a lawsuit against the
City to acquire the property. Under the Health and Safety Code, the property owners in the
project area who are subject to eminent domain have the right to ask the Commission to acquire
the property, and the Commission has the obligation to acquire the property or to make it exempt
from acquisition. Should that property become acquisition exempt, it will take away the ability of
the Commission to ever do an assemblage at that site. Mr. Wallin stated that of the two choices,
it is wiser to acquire the property than to create a "donut hole" in an assembled area. Mr. Wallin
concluded that there is not an immediate necessity.
Commissioner Taylor asked what about the next property owner wanting the City to
condemn it.
Mr. Tripepi stated that these properties should be acquired by the City as they become
available for future developers who are putting together a project. Mr. Tripepi pointed out that it
will be easier for the developer to deal with the Commission rather than deal with 15 or so
different property owners.
VERBATIM DIALOGUE BEGINS:
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We have had 11 or 12 developers named, none of them have a
sincere proposal right now. They have a project that they think they might do, or they would like
to do. But, the first one, McCoy, came in and he wanted something. Our cost would have been
somewhere at $80 million by the time we bought the land, sold the bonds, and whatever. It
would have been $80 million in the long run of taxpayers money. The next one that came in,
we're down to about $40 to $44 million. That's the figure that I recall him filling out. It may be
a discrepancy....
CDCMINLT'ES:3-26-02
Page #3
FRANK TRIPEPI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: It was substantially less than the project...
TAYLOR: Okay. It was half of that, of what it was.
TRIPEPI: McCoy was talking 30 acres. I think this other store was like 18 acres.
TAYLOR: That's correct. Now we're down to $40 to $44 million of taxpayers money in the
long run, whatever we have to finance.
TRIPEPI: Well, that's a determination that the Agency would make at the time. The issue here
is, basically, the acquisition of the property would just make it that much easier for the developer
to come and do the project. And, it would probably make the project cost less because he comes
in and basically would deal with the Agency for raw land as opposed to improved property.
TAYLOR: That leads us further down the road where we get into a problem. Okay, we're
buying land, we're sitting with it. We look like jackasses. Now we've got to sell it at a loss.
And that is what's being proposed. We acquire it and sell it at a loss.
COMMISIONER MARGARET CLARK: I'd like to ask that we defer this until we get a little
more information.
TAYLOR: You don't have four votes tonight. You've only got 75%.
TRIPEPI: We'll defer it then.
VERBATIM DIALOGUE ENDS.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CLARK, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
VASQUEZ that this item be continued to the next meeting. Vote resulted:
Aye:
Vasquez, Clark, Bruesch, Taylor
No:
None
Absent:
Imperial
Abstain:
None
The Vice-Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
3. AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR GARVEY AVENUE COMMUNITY
CENTER AND SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT FOR FURNITURE, FIXTURES
AND EQUIPMENT
Commissioner Taylor stated that he is not comfortable with the bid opening date of April
11 u. Mr. Taylor stated that that date only gives the bidders 5 to 6 working days to gather their
figures.
Doug Joyce, Onyx Architects, stated that the date can be changed.
CDCM1=S:3.26-02
Page #4
Frank Tripepi, Executive Director, suggested that the date be extended for two additional
weeks.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CLARK
that the Commission approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Executive Director
to advertise for bids, extending the deadline date an additional two weeks. Vote resulted:
Aye:
Vasquez, Clark, Bruesch, Taylor
No:
None
Absent:
Imperial
Abstain:
None
The Vice-Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
4. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS - None
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MATTERS -None
6. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further action at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. The
next regular meeting is scheduled for April 9, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Commission Secretary
APPROVED:
CHAIRMAN
CDCMn4UTES:3-26-02
Page #5