Twentynine Palms, Ca– I am going to keep hammering you folks about the need for you to Attend Tuesday’s City Council Meeting and filling out the form letter below to members of The City Council to not vote for the proposed RDA Bond.
Look we have a city that has never had to borrow money that is financially sound and has nothing in its future to demand that the Council in the guise of the RDA to issue bonds. Besides the end around of the constitutional requirement that bond issues be settled at the ballot box and not the back room of city hall, we do not need to borrow the money.
Please plan to attend the council meeting on Tuesday night 6PM at City Hall this might be the one and only time you have to express your feelings about this issue. The Council plans to move ahead with this bond issue and only a strong and vocal crowd attending may turn the tide.
If you are not able to attend…. please…. please fill out the below form letter that will be sent to all City Council Members. Put into your own words why you feel that this Bond Issue is a bad idea.
.
.
.
[contact-form 6 "bond out"]
![[UNSET]](http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/UNSET-75x75.jpg "Local Smoke Shops Shut Down By Sheriff’s Department")
RDA Waste: The Williams Insurance Boondoggle
The following is an extract of the staff report from the November 10, 2009 council meeting:
http://www.ci.twentynine-palms.ca.us/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/cca20091110r.pdf
On June 9 2009, the Redevelopment Agency (“Agency”) approved an Owner Participation Agreement (“OPA”) with Jerry Mattos and Stephanie Ince (“Participant”). Per the OPA, the Participant will construct $100,000 of site and building improvements at a property located at 6255-6263 Adobe Road; the Participant is funding fund the first $10,000 of improvements, and the Agency the remaining $90,000 of improvements. The scope of work includes removing a blighted structure; rehabilitating two commercial buildings; curb, gutter, sidewalk, and driveway improvements; and paving the parking lot. The Agency’s $90,000 investment is structured as a loan that is forgiven if the property continues to be occupied by professional service and/or retail businesses for a 3 year period.
During the design and the initial construction process the Participant identified additional landscaping and parking lot enhancements that would further improve this property. The Participant requested $22,000 in additional funding from the Agency. The Agency Board considered the request and agreed to consider $11,000 of additional funding; the Participant subsequently agreed to provide $11,000 in matching funds. These funds will pay for added landscaping improvements (to be installed in the landscaped areas that abut the buildings), and to stucco a block wall located in the parking lot.
Amendment No. 1 modifies the OPA by increasing the Agency Loan from $90,000 to $101,000, adds the new improvements to the OPA’s project description, and amends the Loan Note to include the additional Agency funding.
WHAT DID WE GET: So, what did we get for our $101,000 investment of taxpayer money? Were any new jobs created? Were property values improved?
NEW JOBS: Prior to this agreement, there were 4 businesses occupying 3 buildings (taxi service, insurance office, tanning salon, and an office supply store). Today there are 3 businesses; the taxi service is gone because that little building was torn down. Were any new jobs created? I’ll let you do the math.
PROPERTY VALUES: The agreement covered 3 parcels (623-061-10, 11, & 12). Pulled from the county PIMS (Property Information Management System) are the assessed property values for the last 3 years.
http://nppublic.co.san-bernardino.ca.us/newpims/(S(wwhtcq45nfu3n045lvlfea45))/PIMSINTERFACE.ASPX
PARCEL / 2008 / 2009 / 2010
623-061-10 / 22,053 / 22,494 / 22,441
623-061-11 / 77,185 / 78,729 / 22,441
623-061-12 / 132,317 / 134,963 / 134,643
Total Value: / 231,555 / 236,186 / 179,525
The general tax levy is 1% of assessed value and of that 1% the city receives 26.38%.
Tax Year / 2008 / 2009 / 2010
General Tax Levy / 2,315.55 / 2,361.86 / 1,795.25
City Receives / 610.84 / 623.06 / 473.59
The end result for a 101,000 investment of taxpayer dollars is 1) no new jobs have been created and 2) the property value has actually dropped by $56,661 resulting in the city receiving $149.47 LESS in tax revenue this year.
Wow, how many three-finger handjobs did it take to seal this boondoggle of a deal?
Excellent example of how ineffective RDAs have been. When the Council seated as the RDA is unable to juggle $90k properly why should we allow them to juggle the principle of $12.5 Million?
What they plan will break the city. Dumbest idea ever.