Loading...
CDC - Minutes 03-26-02 (2)No"" 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. CDCMINUTES:3-2"2 Page # I 1. CDC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-01CLAIMS 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. CDCMINMS: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 I 1 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.... CDCMIN=8:3-26-02 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 I Vh. 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. CDCMINU TES: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 CDCMINUTF.S:3-26-02 Page #5