[ Please take notice that the adjourned regular City Council meeting of October 19, 2020, has been adjourned to the time and location indicated below: Location: Council Chamber Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 Time: 6:30 p.m.]
[00:00:12]
I WILL NOW CALL THE ORDER, THE CONTINUED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF OCTOBER 19.LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT IT IS 6:30 PM.
AND WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL COUNTS.
MEMBER SHAW HERE, COUNCIL MEMBER MEDRANO HERE.
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ HAS RECUSED HIMSELF, BUT HE WILL BE JOINING THE MEETING IN A LITTLE BIT.
MAYOR PRO TEM ESPINOSA HERE, MAYOR BEAMISH HERE.
I WOULD JUST REMIND EVERYBODY THAT DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS, THAT PUBLIC COMMENTS SHE'LL BE LIMIT, SHE'LL BE UNLIMITED PER INDIVIDUAL, AND THERE'S NO LIMIT TO THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TIME AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
COMMENTS MUST BE KEPT BRIEF NON-REPETITIVE AND PROFESSIONAL IN NATURE.
HOWEVER, WE, LAST NIGHT WE HAD TWO SPEAKERS LEFT THAT WERE CARRIED OVER TODAY AND THEN WE'LL HAVE REBUTTAL AND THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
AS A REMINDER, ANYONE WHO BECOMES ABUSIVE OR DISPLAYS INAPPROPRIATE PUBLIC BEHAVIOR WILL BE TOLD TO STOP SPEAKING AND LEAVE THE COUNCIL CHAMBER PURSUANT TO ESTABLISH POLICY.
THE MEETING WILL CONCLUDE AT 10:30 PM.
THE MEETING IS EXTENDED BY THE MAYOR AND BUSINESS NOT COMPLETED BY THIS TIME WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
IF AN ADDITIONAL MEETING BECOMES A NECESSARY THE CITY COUNCIL AND TENDS TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING TIME AND BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL.
CHAMBERS CASSIDY CITY COUNCIL WILL TAKE HEALTH BREAKS AT THE MAYOR'S DISCRETION AND RECESS FOR A SHORT PERIOD.
SO AT THIS TIME I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO LAST SPEAKERS AND OPPOSITION AND THE FIRST ONE MAY ENTER AND WE'LL START.
HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M A LAND USE LAWYER REPRESENTING SAVE LAHABRA.
90 10 99 TIMES OUT OF A HUNDRED.
I REPRESENT A DEVELOPER OR A LEAD AGENCY LIKE A, LIKE A CITY IN ORDER TO ENSURE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS COMPLY WITH SQL.
IN FACT, I'VE WORKED CLOSELY OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS WITH THE CITY'S OWN EIR CONSULTANT AND MANY OF THE, UH, TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS THAT LINDAR HAS EMPLOYED.
WHAT I'VE OBSERVED ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE IS QUITE EGREGIOUS.
FROM A PROFESSIONAL STANDPOINT, THIS IS A DIFFICULT STATEMENT FOR ME TO MAKE, AS I CURRENTLY REPRESENT SEVERAL HOME BUILDERS.
HOWEVER, WHAT I HOPE IS PLAIN TO SEE THAT THIS IS NOT A PROJECT BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT AS MENTIONED BY THE APPLICANT MONDAY HAS QUOTE, INTEGRITY, WOVEN ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT.
UNQUOTE, THIS CITY COUNCIL IS NOT IN A POSITION TO VOTE ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT IS CLEAR, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT PRESENTED THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT, IDENTIFIED THE CONS AND EXPLAIN THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY HAVE SOUGHT TO RESOLVE THE NEGATIVES.
INSTEAD, THE APPLICANT HAS PUT FORWARD MARKING MARKETING MATERIALS IN AN ATTEMPT CAN CONVINCE THE CITY THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT THE CITY NEEDS WITHOUT DUE CONSIDERATION FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES RAISED EVERY STEP OF THE WAY THE APPLICANT HAS THREATENED LITIGATION.
IF THEY DON'T GET WHAT THEY WANT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY, THE APPLICANT HAS ATTEMPTED TO PORTRAY YOUR CITIZENS AS AN ANGRY MOB WITH PITCHFORKS.
IN FACT, THEY USE THIS NARRATIVE MONDAY IS THE REASON THAT THEY COULD ONLY MUSTER A SINGLE IN-PERSON LAHABRA RESIDENT TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
ONCE YOU REMOVE THE PROPHET BOXES FILLED WITH FALSIFIED SIGNATURES, WHAT'S LEFT.
AS HALF OF THIS COUNCIL HAS ALREADY DETAILED THEIR OWN ADDRESSES WERE USED FRAUDULENTLY.
MANY OF THE PROJECT'S PRIMARY OPPONENTS HAD FRAUDULENT SUPPORT CARDS FILLED OUT IN THEIR NAMES.
THE APPLICANTS PAY PETITION GATHERERS HAVE CONVINCED OPPONENTS TO SIGN THE NAME, SIGN IN THE NAME OF SAVING OPEN SPACE.
WE SERIOUSLY HOPE THAT APPLICANT STANDS READY TO ADDRESS THESE OPEN QUESTIONS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RAISED ON MONDAY ON THE FRAUDULENT ACTIVITY.
AND TO EXPLAIN HOW A REASONABLE PERSON COULD CONCLUDE THAT THIS PROCESS HAS QUOTE, INTEGRITY, WOVEN ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT.
THE APPLICANT LITERALLY TOLD YOU MONDAY THAT THIS PROJECT FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT IS SIMILAR TO A SINGLE GROCERY STORE IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS TO PROVE THIS AS FALSE, ONLY ONE NEED TO LOOK AT THE EIR FOR THIS PROJECT, WHICH ANALYZED DAILY TRIPS OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF 3,676 DAILY TRIPS AND A 12,000 SQUARE FOOT GROCERY
[00:05:01]
STORE IS 1,281 TRIPS.RESIDENTIAL TRIPS HAVE FOUR MORE PEAK AM AND PM TRIPS FROM SEVEN TO 9:00 AM AND FOUR TO 6:00 PM, WHICH CAUSED WORSE TRAFFIC IMPACTS BASED ON THIS SAME METHODOLOGY, EVEN A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT, WALMART WOULD HAVE LESS TRIPS.
IN FACT, THE STATE'S MOST RECENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY PREPARED BY THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING RESEARCH FOR USE BY CITIES, PLANNING DEPARTMENTS AND EVALUATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS STATE THAT QUOTE NEW RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, TYPICALLY REDISTRIBUTE SHOPPING TRIPS RATHER THAN CREATING NEW TRIPS.
IN OTHER WORDS, RESIDENTS ARE NOT DRIVING ACROSS TOWN TO GO TO A GROCERY STORE OR A BANK WHEN ONE IS BUILT CLOSER TO THEIR RESIDENCE.
THE CLAIM THAT TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM THIS PROJECT ARE COMPARABLE TO A GROCERY STORE IS SIMPLY DISINGENUOUS WITH REGARD TO CLAIMS BY THE APPLICANT THAT THE FISH AND WILDLIFE HAVE BEEN ON BOARD THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
THAT STATEMENT IS NOT JUST DISINGENUOUS IT'S.
IN FACT, THE CITY AND FISH AND WILDLIFE ARE IN STARK DISAGREEMENT ON MANY FRONTS, A REVIEW OF THE LATEST COMMENT LETTER FROM FISH AND WILDLIFE.
AND THAT RESPONSE TO THAT LETTER BY THE CITY IS ALL THAT'S NEEDED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT ALTHOUGH A SUBSEQUENT CALL WAS HELD WITH FISH AND WILDLIFE FISH AND WILDLIFE LEAVES, THE CITY AND APPLICANT ARE PROCEEDING QUOTE AT RISK UNQUOTE.
ALTHOUGH THERE'S A MENTION OF MEETING NOTES, THESE DOCUMENTS ARE DOESN'T MEAN THE MEETING NOTES ARE NOT PART OF THE EIR, ALTHOUGH THEY SHOULD BE THE CITY'S RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, IMPROPERLY DEFERS THE MITIGATION TO A LATER DATE IN VIOLATION OF
ALTHOUGH THE EIR STATES, THE CITY OF LA HARBOR BELIEVES THAT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE NOT BEEN IMPROPERLY DEFERRED.
THAT IS NOT THE POSITION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FISH AND WILDLIFE POSITION IS THAT THE MITIGATION SITES SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED APPROVED BY FISH AND WILDLIFE AND ACQUIRED PRIOR TO THE APPLICANT TERMINATING THE CURRENT DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND PRIOR TO THE CITY CERTIFIED IN THE PROJECT, EIR THE WORD PRIOR IS EMPHASIZED IN THE FISH AND WILDLIFE LETTER DATED JANUARY, 2020, THE CITY OF COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF THE PROPOSED MITIGATION TO MITIGATE BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS BEFORE THE PROJECT IS APPROVED, NOT AFTER FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY, I WILL NOT RESPOND TO THE OTHER LUDICROUS STATEMENTS MADE BY THE APPLICANT LIKE HOW THIS PROJECT WILL SAVE WATER.
AND THAT OIL IS NOT HAZARDOUS.
THE CLAIM THAT THIS PROJECT PROJECT WHERE RESERT IN PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE SHOULD BE QUICKLY DISMISSED.
THE EIR ITSELF CONCLUDES SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN THE VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE SITE THAT WOULD RESULT FROM REPLACING THE EXISTING GOLF COURSE WITH THE PROPOSED RANCHO LA HARBOR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WOULD CONSTITUTE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT DUE TO THE LOST LOSS OF OPEN SPACE.
I'LL BE THE FIRST TO SAY I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN SOME PRETTY, PRETTY FUZZY MATH, BUT THE APPLICANT USING UNDEVELOPABLE SLOPE, CONSERVATION AREAS AND LAND REQUIRED TO MITIGATE BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS AS OPEN SPACE THAT THEY ARE PRESERVING TAKES THE CAKE.
ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS CONTINUED TO TOUT THE COMMUNITY CENTER, THE TRAILS, THE PARK THEY HAVE RECENTLY AS OF LAST WEEK, PROPOSED FLEXIBILITY TO REMOVE THESE VERY FEATURES FROM THE PROJECT, AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE REVISED LANGUAGE IS INTENDED TO ALLOW COUNCIL THE OPTION TO SHIFT COMMUNITY BENEFIT IMPROVEMENTS FROM THE PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK, SUCH AS ELIMINATING OR MODIFYING CERTAIN ELEMENTS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT TO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTRIBUTION.
ALTHOUGH NOT CLEAR FROM THE STAFF REPORT, I BELIEVE THE MAIN REASON THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS PROJECT WAS DUE TO THE FAILURE OF THE PROJECT TO ADEQUATELY ACCOUNT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSIDERATIONS.
INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING THESE CONSIDERATIONS, THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE WAS TO REMOVE KEY AMENITIES, THIS ZERO SUM PROPOSAL OF TAKING MONEY DEDICATED TO PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND SHIFTING THEM TO SOME IDENTIFIED FUTURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXPENDITURES IS SUBSTANDARD AND VIOLATE SEQUEL.
THIS PROCESS DOES NOT HAVE INTEGRITY WOVEN ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAW THIS.
WE URGE ALL OF THE NON CONFLICTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AS YOU MR. SHAW, I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU'RE SITTING IN THAT SEAT.
YOU LOST THE ABILITY TO RENDER THE DECISION WHEN YOU MADE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR HOW YOU WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, THE VIDEO, THE VIDEO SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
SO I DON'T NEED TO ADDRESS IT, BUT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, YOUR VOICE, YOUR VOTE IS VOID.
THE CITY IS EITHER COMMITTING MUNICIPAL MALPRACTICE OR YOU'RE SITTING AT THE DYESS AGAINST THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL.
I WOULD ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER YOUR REFUSAL TO RECUSE YOURSELF.
YOU ALREADY MADE YOUR VOTE PUBLICLY KNOWN.
I URGE THIS COUNCIL TO PLEASE LISTEN TO YOUR RESIDENTS AND VOTE NO ON THIS PROJECT.
[00:10:23]
YOU HAVE SOME PLACE, I GUESS RIGHT HERE.MY NAME IS JIM LEES AND I'M A RESIDENT OF HOMBRE AND I'M THE FOUNDER OF SABLE, HOVER.COM.
I WANTED TO WITH YOU ANNOUNCING YOUR RETIREMENT.
I WANTED TO TAKE A MINUTE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR YEARS ON THE COUNCIL.
I KNOW YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN PROUD OF WAITING TO HEAR FROM YOUR RESIDENTS BEFORE MAKING DECISIONS ON THEIR BEHALF, WHICH I FIND VERY COMMENDABLE.
I KNOW YOU ALSO CONSIDER YOURSELF, UH, AND APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL.
YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF ALWAYS INFORMED.
AND BEFORE YOU TAKE YOUR SEAT ON THE COUNCIL EVERY NIGHT, YOU'VE ALL OR EVERY OTHER WEEK, YOU ALWAYS DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE AND YOU ALWAYS KNOW THE ISSUES BEFORE YOU, AND THAT MAKES FOR BETTER DECISIONS.
MAYOR PRO TEM ESPINOSA, YOU'RE INTERESTED IN THE Q A MINUTE.
COMMUNITY GOES FAR BEYOND YOUR POSITION WITH THE COUNCIL.
YOUR LIFE APPEARS TO BE DEDICATED TO HELPING THE COMMUNITY.
YOUR CHARITY WORK IS UNMATCHED.
I KNOW YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF AN INDEPENDENT THINKER ON THE COUNCIL, AND I KNOW HAVING SUCH AN INDEPENDENT THINKER, IT MAKES THE COUNCIL STRONGER.
YOU GOT THROUGH YOUR, YOUR CLUE.
I CALL IT YOUR PLEAD YEARS WITH CLIENT DOLLARS.
YOUR PLEBE YEAR IS A KIND OF ENABLED JARGON, BUT, UH, YOU'RE KIND OF THE START OF A NEW GUARD THAT WILL TAKE THIS, NOT ONLY THIS COUNCIL, BUT THE CITY INTO THE FUTURE.
YOU'VE SHOWN US THAT YOU HAVE THE HIGHEST ETHICS AND INTEGRITY.
AND I BELIEVE THERE COULDN'T BE A BETTER PERSON TO WHOM WE CAN ENTRUST THE CITY'S FUTURE.
WE SINCERELY ARE LOOKING FOR YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING TONIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR ELECTORATE.
I WANT TO FIRST, UH, COMMENT ABOUT SOME OF THE SHADOWY ACTIVITIES AND OUTRIGHT FRAUD COMMITTED BY LAMAR AND ITS SURROGATES.
IT'S ONE THING TO CAMPAIGN PASSIONATELY, BUT IT'S A WHOLE NOTHER THING TO LIE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE RESIDENTS OF LAHABRA.
MAYBE SOME RESIDENTS CAN LIVE WITH SMALLER DECEPTIONS.
LIKE WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO MITIGATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
WE, OR WE HAVE BEEN DIGGING UP MOVING AND REBURYING CONTAMINATED SOIL DURING CONSTRUCTION WON'T HAVE ANY BAD EFFECTS OR REPORTING THAT THE NET CATCHER BIRD IS NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE IN THE PROJECT AREA OR LAMAR HAS, HAS ALWAYS HAD A GREAT RE RELATIONSHIP WITH CDF W AND LASTLY, DON'T WORRY ABOUT OUR PROJECT.
IT'S ALL ABOUT OPEN SPACE AND IT WILL PREVENT DENSE HOUSING IN THE FUTURE, BUT THEN LA LENARA STEPPED UP THEIR DECEPTION BY OFFERING A PETITE PETITION.
YOU ALL SEEN IT, WHICH ASKED THE RESIDENTS IF THEY SUPPORT THE OPEN PARK AND SPACE, THE SCHOOL FUNDING, THE TRAFFIC AND ROAD REPAIR, AND LASTLY, RANCHO LA HARBOR, OF COURSE, WITHOUT EXPLAINING AT ALL WHAT RANCHO LAHABRA IS.
THE FIRST THREE GOALS ARE NOT SO COINCIDENTALLY THE TENT, THE TOP TENANTS OF THE SAFE HARBOR ORGANIZATION, BUT, BUT THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE 443 NEW HOMES TO BE BUILT AS A CORE OF THE RANCHO LAHABRA.
WELL, NARA WAS THE ONE THAT TOLD THE COUNCIL HONESTY IS WOVEN THROUGHOUT OUR ENTIRE PROJECT.
WELL, IT DOESN'T SEEM HONEST TO US, OR FOR THAT MATTER, EVEN SOUND LIKE A ROLE OF A GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN.
WELL, NOW LENARA IS DECEPTION GETS WORSE.
THEY USE THE PETITION IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING TO BOLSTER SUPPORT AND GET THE PROJECT APPROVED UPON PROTEST BY THE PINE COMMISSION AND RESIDENTS WILL NAR AT ITS SECOND APPEARANCE IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION REMOVED HUNDREDS OF SIGNATURES, WHICH BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION WERE IMPROPERLY SUBMITTED LENARA THEN REQUESTS THE CITY, UH, RE
[00:15:01]
REPRESENTED TO THE CITY THAT THE REMAINING SIGNATURES WERE ALL PROPER.HOWEVER, FOR FRAUDULENT SIGNATURES AND PLENTY OF THEM STILL REMAIN STABLE.
HOGGER LAHABRA ORGANIZERS FIRST BECAME SUSPICIOUS WHEN WE SAW SIGNATURE CO COLLECTORS AT THE LOCAL SHOPPING CENTERS, REPRESENTING THEMSELVES AS BEING ALLIED WITH THE SAVE LAHABRA MISSION.
YOU'VE HEARD THE VIDEOTAPE LAST NIGHT.
THIS IS PARTICULARLY SUSPICIOUS BECAUSE THE SAVE LAHABRA HAD NOT HIRED ANY SIGNATURE GATHERS, SAY THE GOLF COURSE, THEY TOLD PASSERBUYS.
AND THEN THE VIDEO LAST NIGHT, THE SIGNATURE GATHER SAID, AND I'LL QUOTE, COULD YOU SIGN THIS ONE? IT'S SO THEY DON'T TEAR THE GOLF COURSE DOWN AND PUT HYPED A HIGH DENSITY HOUSING IS THIS PART OF LUNARS HONEST WE'VE IN ORDER TO ESTIMATE THE EXTENT OF THE FRAUD, BUT CONSERVE OUR VOLUNTEERS SCARCE TIME SAVE.
LAHABRA DECIDED TO EXAMINE EVERY, A VERY SMALL SAMPLE OF ADDRESSES INSIDE OUR COMMUNITY OF THE 171 SIGNATURES IN THAT SAMPLE 168 OR 98% TURNED OUT TO BE FRAUDULENT OR POTENTIALLY FRAUDULENT.
AND I SUBMITTED SOMETHING THROUGH JUST NOW THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE CLERK THAT HAS ALL THAT DOCUMENTATION.
NOW, YOU ONLY HEARD FROM A FEW OF THE DEFRAUDED INDIVIDUALS IN YESTERDAY'S HEARING OF THE 168 FRAUDULENCE.
WE KNOW THAT 25 WERE FORD SIGNATURES OF REAL RESIDENTS, 83 WERE REAL ADDRESSES, BUT NOT REAL NAMES.
AND THAT TOTALED THE AFFIDAVITS THAT I JUST PRESENTED OF 108 AFFIDAVITS FROM INDIVIDUALS FROM THE REAL INDIVIDUALS AT THOSE LOCATIONS THAT ATTESTED TO THE FRAUD.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE 19 ADDRESSES IN THE SMALL SAMPLE THAT JUST DON'T EXIST.
KIND OF LIKE WHAT HAPPENED WITH COUNCILMAN ESPINOSA, WHERE SHE FOUND NEAR HER HOUSE, THAT ONE ADDRESS, IT WAS JUST A PARK.
AND LASTLY, WE HAD 41 RESIDENTS WHOSE NAME JUST DON'T MATCH THE ASSOCIATIONS ROSTER.
IN ADDITION, THE ADDRESSES OF ALL THREE FOUNDERS OF SLAVERY HARBOR WERE DISCOVERED ON THE PETITION.
IN MY PARTICULAR CASE, MR. BRANDON NILES ON PAGE NINE, I'M SORRY.
ON PART NINE, PAGE ONE 78 AND TYLER KONG I'M ON PART NINE, PAID 64.
THEY DON'T EVEN LIVE AT MY ADDRESS.
I, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THEY DON'T EXIST IN MARIBEL'S CASE, HER SIGNATURE WAS FORGED ON PART EIGHT, PAGE THREE 21, AND IT'S TWO HAMS GAZE.
THE ADDRESS WAS USED FALSELY TWICE PAGE I'M SORRY, PART FIVE, PAGE THREE 70 AND PART EIGHT, PAGE FIVE 28.
THIS IS VERY TROUBLING, PARTICULARLY SINCE THEY HAVE KNOWN THAT THE PETITION IS FLAWED FOR MORE THAN FOUR WEEKS AND THEY HAVEN'T TAKEN ANY ACTION TO VERIFY ITS CORRECTNESS.
IN FACT, EVEN KNOWING THESE ISSUES, THEY APPEARED TO HAVE DOUBLE DOWN AND SHOUTED FROM THE ROOFTOPS AND IN THEIR MAILERS, HOW THEY HAVE 10,000 RESIDENTS SUPPORTING THE PLAN.
IT'S CLEAR THAT LENARA WILL GO TO ANY MEANS TO DEVELOP A FALSE REALITY OF SUPPORT FOR THEIR PROJECT.
WHEN IT'S ALMOST NONE, NONE OF THE LABA RESIDENTS SUPPORT, THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LONG-TERM WELL-BEING OF OUR CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS.
THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR PROFITS.
AS A YOUNGER VOTER, A YOUNGER VOTERS STATED YESTERDAY, WHO APPEARED AT THE PODIUM, THEY'RE HERE TO COLLECT THE PROFITS, AND THEN THEY'RE OFF TO MAKE THE NEXT DEAL.
EVEN THE, EVEN AT THE BEST, THE MOST NICELY ASSEMBLED DOG AND PONY SHOW LIKE WE SAW TWO DAYS AGO, WON'T CHANGE ANY OF THE DEVS DEVASTATING FACTS OF HOW THEY DECEIVED ALL OF US.
LET'S TURN OUR ATTENTION NOW TO TRAFFIC IMPACTS.
LAHABRA HIS WEBSITE STATES THAT ORIGINALLY THERE WAS NO PLAN TO REQUIRE DEVELOPERS TO FUND TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES.
THE REPORT IDENTIFIES TRAFFIC IMPACTS AS SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.
IT THEN WENT ON TO BLAME THE OTHER CITIES FOR THEIR LACK OF COORDINATION BY NOT HAVING TRAFFIC MITIGATION FUND PROGRAMS. NOW, BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION WITH THE ADJACENT CITIES, THEY MAY HAVE TO HAVE INDIRECT PAYMENTS INTO THAT FUND.
NOW, THIS IS NOT HOW A DEVELOPER INTERESTED IN THE COMMUNITY WOULD ACT, BUT RATHER IT'D BE ONE THAT WAS INTERESTED IN THEIR OWN PROFITS ON OUR SEEMS TO BE, THEY SEEM TO BE CONFUSED.
[00:20:01]
MITIGATION AS BEING A SYNONYM FOR.THE EIR STATES, THE PROJECT WILL BE WE'LL ADD BETWEEN 4,460 200 NEW CAR TRIPS A DAY TODAY, THEY'RE SAYING 4,400 BASED ON TODAY'S REINCARNATION OF THE PLAN EITHER WAY.
IT'S A LOT OF INCREMENTAL CAR TRIPS ON A ROAD DAILY LEONARA LIKEN THE TR THE TRAFFIC TO ONE OF THE BUSIEST STORES IN LAHABRA.
I THINK JOE FILES, OUR CERTIFIED TRAFFIC PLANNER WHO HAD, WHO HAS WELL-RESPECTED MIGHT HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, MIGHT'VE BEEN ABLE TO, UH, TO SAY MORE ABOUT THIS, BUT I THINK HE WAS ASKED TO ABBREVIATE HIS REMARKS.
BUT THE POINT IS THAT EVEN A ONE OR 2% INCREASE IN TRAFFIC CAN CAUSE GRIDLOCKS ON THE ROAD.
JUST HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT'LL TAKE US TO COMMUTE? WELL, NARA DOESN'T CARE.
THEY'VE MET THEIR RE THEIR LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO MITIGATE THE ISSUE.
LET'S TURN OUR TURN TO THE EFFECTS OF OVERCROWDING ON OUR CITY.
THE MENTIONED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ALL URBAN PLANNERS, KNOW THAT SAYING THAT ADDING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, UNITS LIKE THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED BY LENORE, MAKE DEMANDS ON CITY, ROUTE RESOURCES, FAR THE FOREIGN EXCEED THE REVENUES OF THE CITY TAKE IN LUNARS CONCEPT OF THE HOUSE WITHIN A HOUSE WILL ONLY WORSE THAN THAT PROBLEM.
EVERY YEAR IN PLANNER WILL TELL YOU THAT THE HOUSING IS A NET CONSUMER, NOT A NET GENERATOR CASH FOR A CITY BUDGET.
SO LUNARS CONTENTION THAT THIS PROJECT WILL PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE THAN 350,000 PER YEAR TO THE CITY.
COFFERS NEEDS VERIFICATION AND INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL CONSULTANT NEEDS TO EXAMINE THE PROJECT TO ENSURE THAT ALL TRUE COSTS TO THE CITY ARE INCLUDED IN NOT JUST THE ONES PRESENTED BY WHAT APPEARS TO BE A, A DISHONEST BUILDER.
EVERYBODY NEEDS POLICE FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT THEY ALSO NEED A MYRIAD OF OTHER CITY SERVICES AND RESOURCES THAT WOULD GET CONSUMED BY THE PROJECT.
ALL OF WHICH HAVE A REAL COST TO THEM AND NEED TO BE FAIRLY CALCULATED IN THE FINANCIAL REPORT WITHOUT A COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF COST.
THE RESIDENTS OF LAHABRA COULD BE LEFT TO PAY FOR THE SHORTAGE FAR INTO THE FUTURE.
ALSO, YOU CAN SEE THE DEVELOPER ORIGINALLY MISREPRESENTED THE HIGHLY TOUTED IN GENEROUS 3.8 MILLION EDUCATION PAYMENT, WHICH THEY NOW ARE FORCED TO IDENTIFY AS A MANDATORY SCHOOL FEE.
JUST A THUMBNAIL NAIL COPY CALCULATION OF ONE ADDITIONAL STUDENT, ONLY ONE ADDITIONAL STUDENT PER HOUSE MULTIPLIED BY THE AVERAGE COST PER STUDENT PER YEAR IN LA HARBOR OF $9,104 AMOUNTS TO $4.1 MILLION IN THE FIRST YEAR ALONE.
HOW HAS THE SCHOOL FEES THE MOST TO MAKE THE CITY WHOLE IN PERPETUITY? IF YOU CAN'T EVEN COVER THE EXPENSE OF NEW STUDENTS FOR ONE YEAR, OKAY, NOW, NOW GRANTED, THERE'S SOME STATE FUNDING THAT WE GET FOR IT, BUT I, I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD FIND THAT ANYBODY BELIEVES, BELIEVES THAT THE COST TO THE TAXPAYERS WILL HARBOR.
UH, THERE WON'T BE A COST TO THE TAXPAYERS THAT WILL HARBOR NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY, THE FACT REMAINS.
AND I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT FACT, NOT ONE NEW SCHOOL IS BEING BUILT AS PART OF THIS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY, LIKE MANY OF LAMAR'S SO-CALLED GENEROUS CONTRIBUTIONS, WHICH NOW HAVE BEEN EXPOSED WITH MANDATORY FEES.
THESE ARE WOEFULLY INADEQUATE.
THE RENA REQUIREMENTS COME UP OVER AND OVER IN A NARS PRESENTATION.
A FEW MONTHS AGO, I WAS AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND I SPOKE TO THE PRESENTER FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ABOUT THE RENA ISSUE OF MAKING THE 800 ADDITIONAL HOUSING UNITS OVER NINE YEARS, WHICH IS ABOUT 88 HOUSES PER YEAR.
AND HE BELIEVED IT WAS TOTALLY DOABLE, EVEN WITHOUT RANCHO LAHABRA BASED ON THE LAW HARBOR'S HISTORY AND THE NEW LAW CHANGES.
AND I THINK ROY RAMBLIN ALSO SAID HE ALLUDED TO THAT POSSIBILITY ON MONDAY.
SO THE UNSUPPORTED SPECULATION BEING MADE BY LNR AND THEIR SUPPORTERS HAS LITTLE TO NO VALUE.
THIS PROJECT IS TILTED TO THE HIGH PRICE SIDE AND ONLY BENEFITS THE ABOVE AVERAGE CATEGORY.
THE BUILDER ISN'T CONSTRUCTING EVEN ONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING RESIDENCE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT SOIL AND AIR POLLUTION DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER RESIDENTS LIVING THERE CONSTRUCTION SITE HAVE TOLD ME, THEY'RE VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE AIR QUALITY DURING CONSTRUCTION.
THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ELDERLY PARENTS WITH EXISTING RESPIRATORY ISSUES.
AND IN SOME CASES THEY'RE JUST WORRIED ABOUT THEIR CHILDREN.
ADDING TO THE PROBLEM IS THE PROPOSED UNBEARING OF CONTAMINATED
[00:25:01]
SOIL, MOVING IT OR INTO REBURYING IT OR REBURYING IT CAN THIS EVER BE SAFE ENOUGH? THE DEVELOPER HAS SHOWN HE'S NOT TRUSTWORTHY AND HE'S INTERESTED IN PROFITS, NOT THE WELL-BEING OF OUR RESIDENTS.SOME RESIDENTS SAY THEY WILL BE MOVING JUST TO AVOID THE LIFE-THREATENING ISSUE.
YOU REALLY NEED TO CAREFULLY THINK ABOUT THE TOXICITY TOXICITY OF WHAT'S UNDERNEATH THE GOLF COURSE.
NOW YOU CAN BE LITTLE THE FACT THAT IT'S ONLY PETROLEUM, BUT THE CAT STATE OF CALIFORNIA IDENTIFIES PETROLEUM ON THEIR PROPOSITION, 65 LIST.
AND IT STATES BASICALLY IT CAN CAUSE CANCER AND OR BIRTH DEFECTS AND OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HARM RESIDENTS.
AREN'T GOING TO WANT TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO PLAY THERE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION THOUGHT ABOUT IT, AND THEY SAID, AND THEY SAID SO IN THEIR REMARKS, IT TROUBLED THEM.
AS FAR AS THE POLLUTION, AFTER THE HOUSES ARE COMPLETE.
THE AIR STATES THAT THE GREENHOUSE GASES FROM THE HOMES WILL BE 10 TIMES WORSE THAN THOSE OF THE GOLF COURSE.
IT SORT OF GOES WITHOUT SAYING THOUGH, THAT WHEN YOU DEPLETE OPEN SPACES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE A LITTLE BACK AS A PARK, YOU'RE GOING TO HARM THE ENVIRONMENT.
THE BIOLOGICAL STUDIES BRING TO LIGHT SEVERAL INTERESTING ISSUES.
WILDLIFE WILL BE DAMAGED BY THE PROJECT, EVEN IF RELOCATION PROPERTY IS PURCHASED.
BUT I THINK THE IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THE REPLACEMENT LAND HAS NOT BEEN PURCHASED VERY LIKE VERY LIKELY BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER IS IN A HURRY TO GET THIS PROJECT APPROVED PRIOR TO THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, WHEN THE CITIZENS WILL VOTE ON THE S YES, ON MAJOR X TO THE OPEN SPACES IN A 2018 COMMENT ON THEIR EIR, LENARA GOT A SCOLDING SEVEN PAGE LETTER FROM THE CW.
I'M SORRY, THE C D F W SO THAT WE KNOW THE RELATIONSHIP HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN GOOD AS REPRESENTED BY LINDAR.
YOU CAN UNDERSTAND OUR CONCERN GIVEN THIS AND THE DEVELOPER'S STATEMENTS IN THE EIR.
FOR EXAMPLE, THEY TALK ABOUT REMOVING NEST OF BIRDS OUT OF SEASON.
WHEN THE BIRDS AREN'T PRESENT, WHAT'S UP WITH THAT, OR THEY TALK ABOUT NOT SEEING THE NET CATCHER SINCE 2016, WHILE OUR NEIGHBORS ROUTINELY, ROUTINELY GO OUT WITH BINOCULARS AND VIEW AND PHOTOGRAPH THESE BIRDS, THE CITY SHOULD, AT LEAST IT SHOULD AT THE VERY LEAST HOLDER APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT UNTIL THE UNTRUSTWORTHY DEVELOPER REPLACES BUYS REPLACEMENT PROPERTY AND THE CD FW REMOVES THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
I WANT TO TALK A MINUTE ABOUT THE DAMAGE TO THE HOMES, CLOSE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
SHOULD THERE BE ANY, ANY GRADING ACTIVITIES OF THE BUILDER THAT DISTURBED THE GROUND UNDER THE SITE? IT HAS A POTENTIAL OF COSTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS DOLLARS TO REMEDY COTTON SHIRES.
A GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT HAS ALREADY POINTED OUT THE DEFICIENCIES IN THE SOIL TESTING DONE BY THE BUILDER EARTH MOVEMENT ISSUES TODAY ARE CAUSING HOME DAMAGE.
THAT COSTS INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS AS MUCH AS $250,000 PER HOME.
UP ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROJECT.
LENARA NOW PLANS TO REMOVE THE BUTTRESS OF EARTH.
THAT'S HOLDING THIS HILLSIDE DURING, DURING THEIR GRADING AND REPLACING IT AT THE END.
WHEN IT, WHEN THEY DO THEIR FINAL GRADING, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE DISTURBED GROUND BEING WORKED ON BY THE BUILDER FURTHER AFFECTS THE MOVEMENT OF THE HILLSIDE.
THERE'S A REAL CHANCE OF DAMAGE, BUT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO PROCEED ANYHOW, AND JUST THROW IN SOME INADEQUATE MONEY AT A PROBLEM.
SHOULD IT ARISE? THERE ARE BETTER TESTS THAT CAN BE DONE.
COTTON SHIRES TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WERE SKIPPING, PROPER TESTING TO RUSH THIS PROJECT THROUGH IS A WRONG THING TO DO.
THE DEVELOPER MADE THE POINT THAT GOLF, THE GOLF COURSE IS PRIVATE PROPERTY AND CAN NOT BE USED FOR THE PUBLIC USE.
I THINK THEY'RE CONFUSING A COUNTRY CLUB WITH A PRIVATE OWNED GOLF COURSE.
A COUNTRY CLUB IS IN FACT CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.
THAT IS NOT THE CASE WITH THEIR WESTRIDGE GOLF COURSE.
INDEED IT FUNCTIONS VERY SIMILAR TO OTHER COUNTY GOLF COURSES.
OF COURSE, YOU HAVE TO PAY TO PLAY GOLF.
YEAH, WHO'S GOING TO PLAY GOLF FOR FREE, EVEN, EVEN A, UM, A MINI COURT GOLF COURSE WOULD COST YOU CAN'T PLAY IT FOR FREE, BUT YOU GO TO THE DRIVING RANGE, HIT SOME BALLS, PRETTY INEXPENSIVELY.
HOWEVER, JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THE USE OF THE GOLF COURSE DOESN'T MEAN IT DOESN'T DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT DOESN'T BENEFIT THE, THE LAHABRA COMMUNITY IT'S OPEN TO EVERYONE.
[00:30:01]
TO BE DOING A FINE BUSINESS, CONTRARY TO WHAT LEONARA AND THE OWNERS WOULD LIKE YOU TO BELIEVE.IN ADDITION, ANYONE CAN USE THE GLOVE HOUSE AND THE, THAT THE FACILITIES CAN BE RENTED FOR ANY OCCASION.
THIS CAN ALL BE DONE WITHOUT COSTS OF THE CITY TO MAINTAIN THE FACILITIES.
ADDITIONALLY, THE CITY DOES HAVE, UH, DOESN'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH A HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS ON THE SITE, WHICH COULD PRESENT ITSELF AS A PROBLEM.
IF THE CITY OPERATED AS A PUBLIC PARK, THE GOLF COURSE HAS ALREADY STOPPED HOMELESS WALKERS ON THE PROPERTY BY POSTING AND ENFORCING RESTRICTIONS.
THE CITY CAN'T DO THAT AS EASILY.
LET ME TALK FOR JUST A MINUTE ABOUT MAINTAINING THE HARBOR WAY OF LIFESTYLE THAT THEY, EVERYBODY MOVED HERE FOR THIS MAY SOUND UNIMPORTANT TO PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIVE IN THE HARBOR, BUT IT'S THE FOUNDATION OF OUR CITY.
THE RESIDENTS MOVED HERE TO GET AWAY FROM THE DENSITY OF URBANIZATION.
IN MY CASE, THAT WAS LAKEWOOD.
THE CITY IS LOVE FOR ITS RELAXED ATMOSPHERE AND A SMALL TIME CHARM.
THE GENERAL PLAN LAID OUT IN THE 1990S, SUPPORTED THE CITY CHARACTER, AND WE DON'T WANT TO SEE A CHANGE.
WE NEED YOU TO WORK FOR THE RESIDENTS AND PROTECT THE CHOSEN LIFESTYLE.
THAT MEANS DEFENDING US AGAINST COMPANIES AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES PROMOTING DETRIMENTAL CHANGE.
PLEASE LISTEN TO YOUR RESIDENTS AND NOT TO THE OUT-OF-TOWN SUPPORTERS OF THE DEVELOPER.
MANY OF WHOM ARE EMPLOYED OR HAVE AFFILIATIONS WITH DNR.
YOU ARE SURROGATES UNTIL THE ELECTRIC GETS THE VOTE.
DON'T APPROVE THIS RUSH PROJECT AS IS.
IT'S JUST NOT COINCIDENTAL THAT THE BUILDER IS TRYING TO PUSH THE PROJECT THROUGH AN OCTOBER, ACTUALLY OVERLAPPING THE ELECTION VOTING, WHICH HAS ALREADY STARTED THE FIRST WEEK OF OCTOBER.
THEY MIGHT WANT TO CONVINCE YOU THAT THE RESIDENTS WANT THE PROJECT, BUT THEY KNOW THE SCORE AND THEY KNOW THE ELECTORATE WILL VOTE AGAINST RANCHO HOBERT, AS SOON AS THEY GET THE VOTE.
WHY DO YOU THINK ONLY ONE LAHABRA RESIDENT WAS HERE TO SPEAK IN A LIVE, TO SPEAK, LIVE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT, THE REST, THE REST OF THE PRESENTATIONS YESTERDAY AND BEFORE.
IT WAS REALLY THE DAY BEFORE OUR WE'RE NOTHING MORE THAN OUT-OF-TOWN LOBBYISTS AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS.
I THINK, I THINK YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THAT FALSE REALITY.
SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO MAKE THE MISTAKE OF APPROVING A PROJECT BY GOING AROUND YOUR VOTERS, PARTICULARLY WITH A DEVELOPER HAS PROVEN TO BE DISHONEST.
THERE'S NOT A SINGLE AFFORDABLE HOUSE BEING BUILT IN THAT 443 COMMUNITY HOME COMMUNITY.
ANDREW HAUN OF, OF LANARK SAID AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THIS IS THE BEST PLAN FOR LAHABRA.
BUT I THINK WHAT HE REALLY WAS SAYING IS THAT THIS IS THE MOST PROFIT PROFITABLE PLAN FOR LEONARA.
DON'T LET THEM, LEONARA GET AWAY WITH A POULTRY MILLION DOLLAR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE TO BE USED AT SOME FUTURE POINT.
NOW, THIS BRINGS ME TO MY LAST POINT, AND IT'S ONE THAT I'VE ONLY HEARD ONCE MENTIONED ONCE BEFORE.
AND THAT'S HOW THE PROJECT HAS CHANGED SINCE THE VOTE FOUR TO ONE BY THE FOUR, ONE FOUR TO ONE AGAINST THE PROJECT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND I THINK THE FIRST QUESTION IS, HAS LENARA INCREASED THE TITLEMENTS TO THE CITY, NOT BY $1 HAS ONE NAR CHANGED THE PLAN TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN RANCHO LAHABRA NOPE, NOT EVEN ONE HOUSE OF THE FORT, 143 BEING BUILT WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THE ONE THING THAT DID CHANGE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THOUGH, AND THAT IS THAT LAMAR HAS BEEN ADDED WORDING WELL LENARA HAS ADDED WORDING THAT COULD VERY WELL TAKE AWAY SOME OR ALL OF THE PROMISED IMPROVEMENTS IN ATTEMPT TO TRICK YOU TO APPROVING THE PROJECT.
THE ELEMENTS OF SCOPE THAT COULD NOW DISAPPEAR ARE THOSE THAT ARE TOUTED AS BEING OPEN TO ALL A LA HARBOR RESIDENTS.
THEY INCLUDE SUCH THINGS AS THE GUEST ARRIVAL AREA, THE PARK PROMENADE, THE OUTDOORS EVENT AREA, THE COVERED EVENT, PATIO, THE COURTYARD, THE REMODELED COMMUNITY CENTER, THE NEW RESTROOMS, THE CHILDREN'S SPLASH PAD, THE CHILDREN'S PLAY STRUCTURE, THE COVERED GROUP PICNIC PAVILIONS, THE BAKA BALL COURT OPEN PLAY LAWNS FIREPLACE FOR THE BILLION, THE CONCERT PAVILION, THE NEW COMMUNITY TRAILS, THE OUTDOOR EXERCISE, EQUIPMENT PARKS, STAIRWAY, AND HAND RAILS.
THE SAM, UH, THE SANDBOX PLAY AREA, PICNICS, TRELLIS, AND AREA LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION, AND LIGHTING.
YOU KNOW, ALL THE NICE PICTURES THAT YOU SAW IN LENORA'S PRESENTATION.
IT COULD ALL BE GONE IN A FLASH AT SOME LATER COUNCIL OR POSSIBLY A CITY STAFF DISCRETION.
[00:35:01]
WHAT GOOD IS A PROJECT? WHAT GOOD IS A PROJECT DESCRIPTION? IF IT'S NOT FINAL, HOW TRANSPARENT IS A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS? IF THE PROJECT IS IN A CONSTANT STATE OF FLUX AND COULD CHANGE DRAMATICALLY AFTER APPROVAL YET, THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF DISHONEST DEAL THAT LENARA WANTS TO MAKE WITH US.AND YOU CAN CHECK THIS, IT, ALL OF THESE IS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT F1 AND F TWO OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COULD BE GUTTED FROM THE PROJECT TO FUND TO FUND A CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THEY CAN JUST SWAP OUT AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF COSTS FOR THOSE PELVIC AMENITIES GOING AWAY.
YES, THAT MEANS THAT THE PUBLIC AMENITIES LENARA HAS PROMOTED AND PUBLICIZED TILL THE HOTTER RESIDENTS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO GET THE RESIDENTS TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT WILL BE GONE.
IF THE CITY CHOOSES SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE TO ACCEPT THE FULL AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE, LAMAR IS ASKING THE COUNSELOR TO NOW APPROVE AN EVEN MORE UNDEFINED PROJECT WITH, WITH POSSIBLE MAJOR CHANGES FROM THE EIR THEY PRESENTED
IT'S A GAME OF SMOKE IN MIRRORS WHERE THEY HAVE TO ROB PETER TO PAY PAUL, MAKING THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT LOOK BIGGER THAN IT REALLY IS.
NO WONDER YOU CAN'T TRUST THEM TO HER.
THEY WANT TO PITCH A DIFFERENT PROJECT TO EACH OF YOU, BASED ON WHAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER WANTS TO SEE IN THE PROJECT.
ONE COUNCIL MEMBER MAY WANT THE COMMUNITY CENTER.
ANOTHER MIGHT WANT THE PLAYGROUND OR THIRD MIGHT WANT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT DON'T BE FOOLED.
THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY IN THE PROJECT TO PAY FOR ALL THAT.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE $1 SINCE THE PLANNING HERE, PERIOD, SINCE THE PLANNING HEARING, THEY JUST WANT TO RUSH THE PROJECT FOR PROJECT APPROVAL NOW AND FORCE YOU TO TRADE OUT LATER.
THEY WANT THE CITY TO APPROVE THE PROJECT THAT IS MUCH MURKIER TODAY THAN IT WAS FOUR WEEKS AGO.
WHEN IT WAS VOTED DOWN FOUR TO ONE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
LET ME DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE REVISED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
SECTION F THREE AND F FOUR UNDER PUBLIC BENEFITS.
EVERY DOLLAR THAT GOES TO THE, TO THE CITY TO FACILITATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A LIKE AMOUNT COMES OUT OF THE PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC AMENITIES OF THE PROJECT.
WHAT A SWEET DEAL FOR THE DEVELOPER.
THEY CAN PROMISE IT ALL WHILE IN REALITY, THEY CAN'T ALL BE DELIVERED BECAUSE THEY DON'T, THEY HAVEN'T PUT ONE MORE DOLLAR OF ADDITIONAL DOLLAR EVENT TOWARDS ANYTHING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR OTHERWISE.
GIVEN LAURA'S TRACK RECORD OF SHADY AND FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THIS PROJECT, THE COUNSELOR SHOULD NOT TRUST ANY UNDEFINED PROJECT WITH ITS DEVELOPMENT.
THE DEVELOPER LENARA KNOWS THEY DON'T HAVE THE SUPPORT OF LAHABRA RESIDENTS AND THEY HOPE IT WON'T BE REVEALED BEFORE THEY GET AND RUSH THIS PROJECT THROUGH.
THEY KNOW IN TWO WEEKS, THE ELECTRIC WILL HAVE A VOICE AND IT'S NOT THE VOICE THEY WANT TO HEAR.
IT'S UP TO THE TWO, YOU, THE FOUR COUNTS MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE HARBOR RESIDENTS AND REJECT THIS PROJECT.
DON'T MAKE THE MISTAKE OF BACKING THE SHADY DEVELOPER OVER YOUR RESIDENTS.
VOTING NO ON RANCHO HARBOR IS THE RIGHT AND POPULAR DECISION TO MAKE AND WILL AFFECT HOW YOU ARE ALL VIEWED BY THE ELECTORATE.
NOT ONLY IN THIS COMING ELECTION, BUT IN YOUR LEGACY OF STEWARDSHIP OF THE LOBBER WAY OF LIFE.
PLEASE SPEAK TO, UH, PLEASE SPEAK FOR US AND VOTE.
AND I'D LIKE TO SAY BEFORE I STEP AWAY THAT HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME I COME IN FRONT OF YOU.
AND I WANT TO THANK ALL THE SUPPORTERS OF SLAVERY HARBOR OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
WE'D ONLY BE HERE BECAUSE OF THEIR HARD WORK.
I'VE LEARNED A LOT FROM THE RESIDENTS OF LA HARBOR AND I MADE A LOT OF FRIENDS AND I'VE ENJOYED THE EXPERIENCE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND GOOD NIGHT.
SO THAT CONCLUDES THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
SO NOW THE APPLICANT WILL NOW HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL.
WHEN THE APPLICANT LIKE TO GET A REBUTTAL.
[00:41:34]
JUST A MINUTE HERE.THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
I APPRECIATE THEY WENT QUICKLY THOUGH.
I WILL DO MY BEST TO DO THE SAME.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE OKAY IF I JUST GO THROUGH THIS, ARE WE WAITING FOR SOMETHING? UH, YES.
IF IT'S NOT READY, WE JUST GOT TO GO WHAT'S THAT? NO, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I'M GOING TO, I THINK WE'VE SEEN THIS.
I THINK I'M GOING TO GO SHORTLY AND SUCCINCTLY AND WE ALL CAN FOLLOW ALONG WITH OUR POWERPOINT SLIDES.
MAYOR BEAMISH MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL STAFF.
I'M GARY JONES WITH LENORE HOMES.
WE APPRECIATE AND THANK YOU FOR THIS REBUTTAL OPPORTUNITY.
AS I STATED AT THE BEGINNING OF MY PRESENTATION ON MONDAY NIGHT, YOU HEARD INTENSE PASSION FROM THOSE OPPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT WE'VE KNOWLEDGED.
THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT OF GREAT INTEREST IN THE CITY.
IT IS INTEREST IN THE CITY BECAUSE SOUTHERN CA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA'S POPULATION WILL GROW AND MORE HOMES WILL NEED TO BE BUILT.
THE QUESTION YOU HAD BEFORE YOU ISN'T, WHETHER LAHABRA SHOULD GROW, IT'S HOW WE SHOULD GROW.
AND WE DID HEAR A LOT OF THAT ON BOTH SIDES IS HOW IT SHOULD WE GROW.
AS WE SAID, IN OUR PRESENTATION, CHOOSING TO GROW WITH A LARGE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY PROVIDES OPEN SPACE RECREATION AND FISCAL BENEFITS THAT A NUMBER OF SMALL PROJECT JUST CAN'T DO WE TRUST YOU RECOGNIZE THIS AND SUPPORT OUR CONCEPT.
THERE WERE NUMEROUS THE ACTUAL INCORRECT INFORMATION THAT WAS SAID DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, OUR TIME WOULD BE SPENT ON COMICS COVERING JUST SOME OF THE MAJOR TOPICS WHERE WE REVIEW.
I URGE YOU TO ASK QUESTIONS TO THE CITY STAFF AND THE EIR CONSULTANTS AS YOU DELIBERATE, THE A R IS AS THOROUGH AS IT CAN BE.
IT'S THE END PRODUCT OF FIVE YEARS OF HARD WORK FROM YOUR STAFF AND, AND NUMEROUS CONSULTANTS ON THE SUBJECT MATTERS REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE WORK WITH YOUR STAFF TO REACH AN AGREEMENT OF $1 MILLION AFFORDABLE
[00:45:01]
HOUSING FEE.IF YOU FEEL THE CONTRIBUTION SHOULD BE LARGER, WE ARE OPEN TO HAVING THAT DISCUSSION.
AS YOU RECALL, OUR BENEFITS PACKAGE PER HOME, AS AN EXCESS OF $90,000 PER HOME, THERE ARE MANY WAYS TO CONFIGURE THIS BENEFITS.
IF YOU DESIRE THE ATTORNEY IS WRONG ON ONE THING THOUGH, THAT WE'RE NOT REMOVING BENEFITS FROM THE PACKAGE BY OFFERING TO BE FLEXIBLE.
IT'S NOT A WHOLESALE REMOVER AND WHOLESALE.
RE-EVALUATION THE MONEY'S THERE.
AND FORGIVE ME JUST FOR A SEC, CAUSE IT IS HARD TO BREATHE THROUGH THESE
ANOTHER POINT IS ON BIOLOGY, A SPEAKER CLAIM THAT THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE WAS STILL OPPOSING THE PROJECT.
THEY HAVE NOT SIGNED OFF ON THE PRO.
THEY HAVE NOT SIGNED OFF ON THE PROJECT YET.
WE PRESENTED THEM WITH A NUMBER OF MITIGATION CONCEPTS FOR PURCHASE OF OFFSITE HABITAT, AS WELL AS CREATION OF ONSITE HABITAT, WE WILL PURCHASE THE MITIGATION SITE OR PURCHASE CREDITS IN A MITIGATION BANK.
ONCE THE APPROVAL, THE PROJECT OCCURS NOT BEFORE.
THIS IS THE WAY IT'S ALWAYS DONE ON PROJECTS.
IT'S NEVER DONE UPFRONT THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME.
AND I THINK YOUR STAFF WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT.
WE DO THIS ALL IN CONSULTATION WITH CDF G AND WE'LL FULFILL THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.
SO THE DEED RESTRICTION, WE WILL HAVE TO FULFILL THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS BEFORE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE VACATED.
THIS APPROACH APPROACH IS VERY COMMON IN CALIFORNIA.
NEXT, UH, MAYOR BEMIS, YOU ASKED A QUESTION, A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE SOILS.
ONE OF IT WAS THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE OIL SOIL, THE SOILS.
WHAT WAS THAT? OUR SOILS EXPERT CONFIRMED IT'S CLASSIFIED AS NON-HAZARDOUS.
WE WERE ASKED ALSO TO CONSIDER TRANSPORTING CRUDE OIL, SATURATED SOILS OFF THE SITE.
WE HAVE CONSIDERED THAT, UM, THE MATTER WAS EVALUATED IN THE EIR BECAUSE SEEQUA ENCOURAGES THE STUDY OF ALL ALTERNATIVES.
THE QUESTION OF WHERE IT COULD BE HAULED FOR DISPOSAL IS EASILY ANSWER.
IT COULD BE, IT COULD GO TO THE CLEAREST CLOSEST LANDFILL, BUT THERE IS NO NEED TO GO TO LANDFILL BECAUSE THOSE SOILS ARE NOT HAZARDOUS.
AND THE BIGGEST THING, IF IT'S NOT HAZARDOUS, WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE ALL THE TRAFFIC TRIPS THAT COME WITH THAT.
IF THAT WAS TO HAPPEN, IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE A YEAR AND A HALF JUST TO TRUCK, THOSE SOILS BACK AND FORTH.
SO AGAIN, IF IT'S NOT NECESSARY, NOT USEFUL TO HAVE THE IMPACTS.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT WELCOME, UH, ADDRESSING MR.
WE ALL RESPECT HIS DESERVED REPUTATION AS A TRAFFIC EXPERT.
I TALKED TO MY SECRET ATTORNEY.
HE DID HAVE HIM IN HIGH ESTEEM.
HE IS A TRAFFIC EXPERT THOUGH.
HE'S NOT, HE'S NOT A SEQUEL EXPERT IN THIS QUESTION IS A SECRET RELATED.
I BELIEVE STAFF STUDIED IT AND THEY MIGHT TALK ABOUT IT LATER ON OR NOT.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN ADDRESS IT TO STAFF.
UM, ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WOULD HAVE JUST KIND OF BROUGHT UP RIGHT NOW IS, UM, THE CLAIM OF COMPARING IT TO A SUPERMARKET AND OUR PRESENTATION.
WE DID TALK ABOUT DAILY TRIPS.
WE DIDN'T, WE TALKED ABOUT DAILY TRIPS AND WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THE AIR, UM, THE STUDY, THE TRIPS AND THE APAC IMPACTS IN DETAIL AND THE COMPARISON WAS MADE.
SO THAT BRINGS US NOW TO THE VERY TROUBLING TOPIC OF ALLEGATIONS REGARDING SUPPORT CARDS THAT THE BIA PROVIDED TO THE CITY.
I HAVE ASKED STEVE LAMONT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE B I A O C, TO ADDRESS YOU SINCE THIS WAS BIA HIS EFFORTS AND NOT OURS.
STEVE, DO I HAVE A POWERPOINT? VERY GOOD, GOOD EVENING.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, STEVE LAMONT REPRESENTING THE BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF ORANGE COUNTY.
AS GARY SAID, THIS EFFORT WAS NOT MINNAAR.
I'M SPEAKING YOU ON SPEAKING TO YOU TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE BA, WE GOT INVOLVED IN UNDERTOOK A GRASSROOTS OUTREACH ADVOCACY CAMPAIGN IN LAHABRA BECAUSE WE LIKE LINDAR.
WE'RE FINDING IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT SABLE HUBBARD DID NOT HAVE THE SUPPORT THAT IT SAID IT DIDN'T AS PART OF OUR LOCAL EFFORT.
WE WALKED NEIGHBORHOODS, WE HELD FOCUS GROUPS.
WE DID SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGNS, DIRECT MAILERS, AND YES, A SIGNATURE GATHERING EFFORT TO DO THIS.
WE USE PAID PETITION GATHERERS JUST AS SEYVAL HARBOR DID FOR MEASURE X BI.
HASN'T BEEN INVOLVED IN ADVOCACY FOR OVER
[00:50:01]
95 YEARS.THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE BEEN CONFRONTED WITH THIS ISSUE.
WE HAVE WORKED FEVEROUSLY SINCE LAST NIGHT TO DETERMINE HOW THIS HAPPENED.
AS A REMINDER, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE SIGNATURE GATHERING EFFORT WAS UNDER NO REQUIREMENT TO ATTAIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SIGNATURES.
AS THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN TO QUALIFY A PETITION.
WE JUST WANTED TO MEASURE OPINION IN LAHABRA.
THEN WE BEGAN TO SEND CARDS TO COUNCIL MEMBERS BY TURNING THEM INTO THE CITY CLERK AT THE RATE OF ABOUT 1500 A DAY BY SUBMITTING, WE MADE THEM PUBLIC RECORD AND AVAILABLE FOR ALL TO SEE THEY ARE CURRENTLY POSTED ON THE WEBSITE AND ACTUAL HARD COPIES ARE IN THE BOXES THAT WE TURNED IN ON MONDAY.
SO ASK YOURSELF, GIVEN THE TRANSPARENCY THAT WE BUILT INTO THIS EFFORT, WHY WOULD WE HAVE SENT CARDS IN ADVANCED? IF WE KNEW THAT THEY WERE FALSIFIED SIGNATURES OR ADDRESSES, AND IF WE WERE CREATING FALSE CARDS, WHY ON EARTH WOULD WE FALSIFY CARDS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS ADDRESSES OR FROM THEIR FAMILIES? WHY WOULD WE EVEN INCLUDE CARDS SUPPOSEDLY SIGNED BY WESTBRIDGE RESIDENTS WHERE MOST OF THE OPPOSITION IS CENTERED AND MOST CURIOUSLY, WHY WOULD WE HAVE FALSIFIED CARDS FROM THE ENTIRE SAVE LAHABRA BOARD AS ALLEGED IN A LETTER AND ALLEGED IT'S? I BELIEVE IT WAS YESTERDAY AT CITY COUNCIL, THE MOST OBVIOUS AND MOST TRUE STATEMENT IS NO, WE WOULD NOT DO THIS.
WE WOULD HAVE JUST ROLLED THE BOXES IN ON MONDAY NIGHT AT THE LAST MINUTE, INSTEAD OF COMPLETING, UH, IN WHAT OUR OPINION WAS A TRANSPARENCY MEASURE BY SUBMITTING THESE CARS TO THE CITY WITH PLENTY OF TIME TO REVIEW WHOEVER PERPETRATED THIS DID NOT KNOW THAT EVERY ONE OF OUR CARS THAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY WAS ENTERED INTO A DATABASE.
WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED USING THAT DATABASE TO INVESTIGATE THE CARDS IN QUESTION.
AND I BROUGHT A HARD COPY OF OUR DATABASE HERE TODAY, BASED ON THIS EARLY WORK, WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT CARDS FROM SOME OF THOSE SPEAKERS WERE IN OUR DATABASE, BUT BEFORE JUMPING TO ANY CONCLUSION THAT SOMEONE FROM OUR SIDE DID THIS THINK OF HOW EASY IT WOULD BE FOR ONE OF OUR OPPONENTS TO APPROACH ONE OF OUR SIGNATURE GATHERERS AND FILL OUT A CARD WITH FALSE INFORMATION OR FALSE SIGNATURE.
WE'RE ALSO FINDING THAT SOME OF THE SPEAKERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WERE NOT IN OUR DATABASES, WHICH IS TROUBLING BECAUSE THE DATABASE SHOULD HAVE CAPTURED EVERY CARD SUBMITTED RAISING QUESTIONS AS TO WHERE THESE CARDS CAME FROM.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE NAME DANIEL JUNGE WAS STATED LAST NIGHT AS BEING A FALSIFIED CARD.
THE NAME IS NOT IN OUR DATABASE OF SUBMITTED CARDS, NOR WAS THERE A CARD SUBMITTED FROM THE ADDRESS OF DANIEL JUNGE IN WESTBRIDGE.
SO WHERE DID THIS CARD COME FROM? WE DID NOT SUBMIT IT.
SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS I'M GOING TO INVITE EVERYONE WHO SAID THEY WERE A VICTIM OF THIS FALSIFICATION TO SEND ME A PHOTO OF THE CARD, TO MY EMAIL ADDRESS, S L A M O T T E@BIAOC.COM.
AND SO WE CAN GO TO SLIDE TWO, PLEASE.
SO NO ONE IS MORE CONCERNED THAN US IN TERMS OF THE INTEGRITY AND THE PROCESS UNDERSCORING THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THE LETTER FROM THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION.
THEY POINT OUT THAT BI SIGNATURE GATHERING PROTOCOLS WERE REVIEWED BY FORMER CHIEF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE STANDARDS WERE IN PLACE.
AND THAT THIS MATTER WILL BE PURSUED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW.
AS TO THIS PROCESS, BILL HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE SIGNATURE GATHERERS WERE NOT PROVIDED THIS INFORMATION ON RESIDENT VOTER FILES.
IN OTHER WORDS, THEY DID NOT HAVE THIS INFORMATION.
THE LETTER CLOSES BY POINTING OUT THAT IS EXTREMELY REMOTE, THAT THE CLAIMS MADE AGAINST US LIKE FABRICATING CARDS, NAMING EVERY MEMBER OF THE SAVE LAHABRA BOARD ARE TRUE FOR THESE REASONS.
THEY CONTINUE TO SAY THAT BILL WANTS TO INVESTIGATE THIS MATTER FULLY AND WILL SEEK REMEDY FOR ANY MISDEEDS THAT MAY HAVE TRANSPIRED.
IF WE CAN IDENTIFY THE PEOPLE BEHIND THIS DISTURBING CAMPAIGN, WHETHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL, WE WILL PURSUE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THEM.
[00:55:01]
OBVIOUSLY THE LAST THING WE WANTED TO DO WAS CREATE CONTROVERSY IN THE COMMUNITY AND CHANGE YOUR FOCUS FROM RANCHO LAHABRA FROM THE SUPPORT OF RANCHO LAHABRA TO THIS.SO WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE OF THIS? WE KNOW THAT NO ONE IS LEADING THIS CAMPAIGN BY FALSE FROM THE BI FALSIFYING CARDS.
WE KNOW THAT OUR SYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED TO PRESENT TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING.
AND AS I SAID EARLIER, IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.
AND WE ABSOLUTELY KNOW BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT LENORE WAS IN NO WAY INVOLVED IN THIS.
SO IN CLOSING, IF INVESTIGATIONS SHOW THAT ANY OF OUR SIGNATURE GATHERS CREATED FALSE CARDS, WE ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY AND APOLOGIZE.
IF WE FIND OUT THAT FALSIFICATION WAS FROM SOMEONE OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT, THEN THAT PERSON OWES SOMEONE IN APOLOGY.
SO WE ARE COMMITTED TO FINDING OUT WHERE THESE QUESTIONABLE CARDS CAME FROM, EITHER FROM SOMEBODY WORKING FOR US OR SOMEBODY WORKING AGAINST US.
AND WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT, BUT DON'T TRY TO DISCREDIT OR TAKE AWAY FROM THOSE THAT DO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.
I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH A FEW MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS BRIEFLY AND SHORTLY, UM, AND THEY WILL BE, UH, RANDOM.
UM, ONE OF THE ITEMS WE HEARD IN THE PROPOSAL OR IN THE OPPOSITION WAS WE HEARD THAT WE ARE ONLY OFFERING TWO CAR GARAGES, SO THERE'LL BE PARKING PROBLEMS. IN FACT, TWO CARS, A MINIMUM, MANY OF THE HOMES WILL HAVE THREE CAR GARAGES.
ALL DRIVEWAYS ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO HOLD TWO CARS IN THE WE'LL BE ON STREET PARKING.
UM, SOME INFERRED, THE $90 MILLION, I'M SORRY, THE 90 MILLION GALLON NUMBER FOR GOLF COURSE IRRIGATION WAS INFLATED.
THE WATER USE IS VALIDATED IN YOUR EIR.
AND IF YOU'D LIKE ANOTHER SOURCE, YOU CAN GO TO YOUR WATER DEPARTMENT AND CHECK THE BILL.
WE ALSO HEARD THAT THE PROJECT WILL GENERATE 1700 MORE CHILDREN IN SCHOOLS OR MORE THAN FOUR SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN PER EVERY HOME IN THE PROJECT DIR SECTION IN THE SCHOOLS, WHICH WAS DEVELOPED WITH THE LOW SCHOOL SCHOOL DISTRICTS SAYS, WELL, THAT GENERATE ABOUT 200 K THROUGH 12 STUDENTS.
ONE SPEAKER SAID THAT PROJECT WITH HARMONIC BUTTERFLIES, THERE'S NO MONIC BUTTERFLY HABITAT ON THE SITE.
AND AN INTERESTING ONE, MANY SAID THE CITY SHOULD PURCHASE THE GOLF COURSE FOR OPEN SPACE AND A PARK, WHICH OF COURSE YOU WOULD HAVE TO THEN CONSTRUCT THE MAINTAIN.
WHY WOULD, WHY WOULD THE CITY WANT TO GIVE THIS CONSIDERATION WHEN WE'RE OFFERING YOU 80 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE, 16 ACRE PARK, THE TRAILS, AND A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER BUILT TO YOUR SPECIFICATIONS, INDEED IT OVER TO YOU FOR FREE.
AND WE WILL EVEN PAY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PARK AND THE TRAIL SYSTEM.
ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SAID THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF MAKING MONEY AND WE TOTALLY AGREE.
BUT THE CITY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING ESSENTIAL SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY, WHICH DOES REQUIRE MONEY.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT LAHABRA JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER CITY IN CALIFORNIA IS GOING THROUGH TOUGH FISCAL TIMES.
YOU'VE TRIMMED YOUR BUDGETS, STRUGGLED WITH FURLOUGHS AND WORKED ON MANY WAYS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS TO INCREASE REVENUE IT'S REASONABLE, HOWEVER, TO PLAN AND GETTING THE FISCAL PROBLEMS, GETTING WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER.
THAT'S WHY WE HOPE YOU WILL EMBRACE OUR BENEFIT PACKAGE AS A WAY TO HELP LAHABRA TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THESE ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND TO PREVENT FURTHER CUTS TO PROGRAMS THAT I'M SURE DEAR TO MANY RESIDENTS, HEARTS SUCH AS THE CHILDREN MUSEUM.
AND WE CAN GO ON AND ON WHATEVER YOUR LAST BUDGET CUT WAS.
UM, HOPEFULLY THIS WOULD HELP.
IT'S NOT LIKE THIS PROJECT ALONE WILL TURN BACK THE TIDE OF FISCAL DIFFICULTIES, BUT WE WILL BE A STIMULUS TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY AND A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR THE CITY.
IN CLOSING, WE ARE EAGER TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE OVERLOOKED.
WE TRUST THE INFORMATION WE HAVE PROVIDED IN THE AIR AND YOUR STAFF HAS PROVIDED IN THE ER AND OUR RESPONSES TO THESE QUESTIONS.
YOU HAVE ALL, YOU NEED TO MAKE A FAVORABLE DECISION ON THE PROJECT WITH THAT.
ONE QUESTION, JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, YOU MENTIONED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE THAT YOU'RE A WILLING TO INCREASE THAT.
AND THEN BY HOW MUCH WE'RE WILLING TO INCREASE THAT.
UH, AGAIN, WE'RE WILLING TO MOVE AROUND THE PACKAGE OF WHATEVER I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT, MOVING AROUND ANYTHING I'M TALKING ABOUT, ARE YOU SAYING ADDITIONAL NEW MONEY OR YOU'RE JUST GOING TO TAKE IT FROM ANOTHER PLACE TO PUT IN THERE.
WE ARE WILLING TO DO ADDITIONAL MONEY IF THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH WOULD BE WHAT WE'D
[01:00:01]
BE WILLING TO GO UP TO $1 MILLION ON IT, 1 MILLION ADDITIONAL STILL YOU WOULD BRING THAT TO 2 MILLION.AGAIN, WE HEARD THAT AS A CONCERN OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
DOES THAT END YOUR PRESENTATION COUNSEL? HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NOPE.
AT THIS TIME, THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
LET'S SEE HERE AT SEVEN 30, THIS CONCLUDES ALL THE COMMENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED STAFF.
UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN DISCUSSION, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL IT TAKE VERY LONG? CAUSE WE CAN TAKE A BREAK AND THEN YOU HAVE TO DO IT.
OR HOW LONG ARE YOU GOING TO BE? UH, YES.
MR. MAYOR STAFF DOES HAVE SOME COMMENTS.
UH, WE ESTIMATED ABOUT 10 TO 15 MINUTES GO, THANK YOU.
UH, MAYOR BEAMISH MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL STAFF WANTS TO CLARIFY AN ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED REGARDING THE, UH, CFD COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, UH, EARLIER IN THE, UH, HEARINGS, AS WE INDICATED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE MAYOR RECOGNIZED IN HIS QUESTION, THE CREATION OF A CFD AS A SEPARATE AND DISCRETIONARY PROCESS, THAT ACTION IS NOT BEFORE THE COUNCIL TONIGHT, BUT THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THERE MIGHT BE COSTS THAT FALL ON THE CITY, IF A CFD IS NOT FORMED IS A RELEVANT ONE.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF UNDERSTANDING THIS PROJECT, THE CITY CANNOT CONDITION THE PROJECT ON FORMATION OF A CFD IN THE FUTURE.
THAT WOULD BE PRE COMMITTING TO AN OUTCOME OF THE CFD.
BUT THE DEVELOPER HAS INDICATED THAT ITS INTENTION IS THAT THE CITY NOT BEAR ANY OF THE MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER OR PARK, EVEN ONCE THOSE ULTIMATELY ARE DEEDED TO THE CITY.
SO WHAT WE RECOMMEND IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO APPROVE THE PROJECT IS THAT THE COUNCIL DO SO SUBJECT TO INCLUDING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REQUIREMENT THAT THE DEVELOPER PROVIDE ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR MAINTENANCE OF A COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK TO BE PLACED IN ESCROW OR A F D SHOULD ONE BE FORMED IN THE FUTURE.
IN THAT WAY THE CITY WOULD BE PROTECTED, BUT WE ARE ALSO ENSURING THAT THE CFD FORMATION PROCESS REMAINS SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT FROM A DECISION ON THE PROJECT TONIGHT.
I'D NOW LIKE TO INTRODUCE, UH, LLOYD ZOLA FROM MINUTE REAL QUICK, THOUGH.
WHAT WOULD BE THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE MONEY PUT IN TRUST, UM, APPROXIMATELY EIGHT TO 900,008 TO 900,000.
I'D NOW LIKE TO INTRODUCE, UH, LLOYD ZOLA OF MEDIS.
UH, LLOYD'S FROM PREPARED THE EIR AND HE'LL BE COVERING, UH, COMMENTS RELATED TO, UH, OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS OF COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND HE'LL CLARIFY INFORMATION FOR THE COUNCIL.
QUITE A COUPLE OF DAYS HERE, A NUMBER OF COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD, TWO DIFFERENT STORIES ON.
I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY A NUMBER OF ISSUES.
FIRST OF ALL, THE PREPARATION OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, UH, WAS DONE UNDER CONTRACT TO THE CITY OF LA HOMBRE, THE ENTIRETY OF THE EIR VOLUME ONE, THE DRAFT EIR VOLUME TO THE RECIRCULATED DRAFT EIR AND VOLUME THREE.
THE FINAL EIR WERE ALL REVIEWED IN THEIR ENTIRETY BY THE CITY'S SECRET COUNCILS, THE CITY SECRET ATTORNEY, IT WAS ALSO REVIEWED BY CITY STAFF, THE ENTIRETY OF ALL THREE DOCUMENTS, AND THEY ARE ALL IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE CONTENTS OF ALL THREE DOCUMENTS.
IN ADDITION, ALL THE PORTIONS OF VOLUMES, ONE THROUGH THREE THAT ADDRESSED TRAFFIC WERE ALSO REVIEWED BY THE CITY'S TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND THE CITY'S TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, GROVER ASSOCIATES, WHO ARE ALSO IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENTIRETY OF THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IN THE EIR.
WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT SB SEVEN 43 LOS VMT SEEQUA CALIFORNIA, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
NOW STATES THAT TRAFFIC CONGESTION IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
HOWEVER, THE EIR DOES IN FACT, ADDRESS TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND IT DOES SO APPROPRIATELY.
AND THESE ARE THE REASONS THE DRAFT EIR WAS ORIGINALLY RE RELEASED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW IN FEBRUARY OF 2018.
THAT IS 10 MONTHS BEFORE THE SEQUEL GUIDELINES REQUIRING ANALYSIS
[01:05:01]
OF VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED RATHER THAN TRAFFIC CONGESTION WERE ADOPTED.SO AT THE TIME THE DRAFT EIR WAS RELEASED, WHICH IS THE POINT IN TIME THAT THE RULES ARE FIXED FOR THAT DRAFT EIR.
THE GUIDELINES WERE NOT IN PLACE REQUIRING OR PROHIBITING THE USE OF A LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS, WHICH IS A MEASURE OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION NOR WERE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF VMT VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IN PLACE.
THE RECIRCULATION DRAFT EIR WAS PUT OUT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW IN DECEMBER OF 2019, BECAUSE IT WAS A RECIRCULATING RE-CIRCULATION OF THE DRAFT EIR THAT DID NOT RESET THE RULES.
THE RULES FOR THE DRAFT EIR WERE SET IN FEBRUARY OF 2018, THE CONCEPT OR THE IDEA AND THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS PUT IN THERE.
THIS ISSUE WITH REVIEWED WITH THE CITY'S SECRET COUNCIL CITY SECRET ATTORNEY BEFORE THE DRAFT, THE RECIRCULATED DRAFT EIR WENT OUT FOR REVIEW.
IT WAS REVIEWED AGAIN DURING PREPARATION OF THE FINAL EIR AND THE CITY'S ATTORNEY FOR THIS PROJECT, THE ROAR SEQUEL EXPERT LEGAL SECRET EXPERT CONCURRED WITH THE ANALYSES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT THE REASONING AND THE DETAIL OF WHAT I'VE JUST SUMMARIZED WILL BE FOUND IN VOLUME THREE OF THE EIR STARTING ON PAGE TWO DASH ONE 20, AND THAT ALSO PROVIDES RESPONSES, THE CITY'S RESPONSES TO ALL 22 OF THE ISSUES THAT MR FAUST MENTIONED THAT HE HAD RAISED WHEN HE SPOKE LAST NIGHT.
THE OTHER THING THAT I NEED TO SAY IS THAT THE TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES THAT ARE SET IN THE EIR HAVE BEEN ENFORCEABLE FROM DAY ONE.
THOSE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE ENFORCEABLE.
THEY HAVE ALWAYS REQUIRED THE PAYMENT OF FAIR SHARE FEES FOR THE MITIGATION TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT.
THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF DISCUSSION REGARDING CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AND THE TIMING OF THEIR REVIEWS VERSUS THE TIMING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND THE CITY'S ACTION, THE REVIEW PROCESS.
AND IN JANUARY OF 2019, THE CITY RECEIVED A LETTER FROM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.
THAT IS THE COMMENT ON THE EIR YOU'VE HEARD SO MUCH ABOUT.
AND THE DEPARTMENT MADE CERTAIN REQUESTS IN MARCH OF THIS.
LET'S SEE THEIR LETTER WOULD HAVE BEEN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR TO 2020 IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR CITY STAFF AND OUR BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANT AND MYSELF MET WITH CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILD WILDLIFE STAFF TO REVIEW THE MITIGATION PROGRAM.
AND SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU'VE HEARD RAISED TONIGHT AS A RESULT OF THAT MEETING, THE MITIGATION PROGRAM WAS AGREED TO THAT IS NOW SET FORTH IN THE FINAL EIR, THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM.
THAT'S CHAPTER FOUR OF VOLUME THREE, STARTING ON PAGE FOUR DASH THREE, IDENTIFIES THE PROCESS THAT CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AGREED TO.
AND THE PROPER MITIGATION PROCESS THAT THE DEPARTMENT SUPPORTS IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER.
THEY SUPPORT THEIR LETTER OF SUPPORT OR AN EMAIL WAS RECEIVED ALSO ON AUGUST 19TH OF THIS YEAR, IDENTIFYING THEIR SUPPORT, NOT FOR THE PROJECT, WHICH THEY CANNOT DO, BUT FOR THE MITIGATION PROGRAM THAT IS SET FORTH IN THE EIR.
AND AS I SAID, THAT MITIGATION PROGRAM IS, UM, FOUND IN VOLUME THREE, STARTING ON PAGE FOUR DASH THREE.
THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER REGARDING THE TIMING OF THEIR ACTION IS RELEASING THE DEED RESTRICTION, ADOPTING A NEW STREAM BED ALTERATION AGREEMENT, WHICH IS WHAT THIS PROJECT WOULD REQUIRE OUR DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE MUST TAKE.
THEY CAN NOT LEGALLY TAKE THAT TO THAT ACTION BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY, THEIR INTENT, THE INTENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE IS SHOULD THE CITY CERTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.
SHOULD THE CITY APPROVE THE, UM, PROJECT COMPONENTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY? GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIFIC PLAN.
AND SO ON THE PROCESS WOULD WORK LIKE THIS.
THE CITY WOULD NOT APPROVE ANY GRADING ON THE SITE, ANY GROUND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES, YOU WOULD NOT APPROVE THE FINAL MAP FOR
[01:10:01]
THE PROJECT, CREATING THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS BEFORE THE APPLICANT HAS ACTUALLY PURCHASED THE MITIGATION LAND THAT MITIGATION LAND WOULD NOT BE PURCHASED UNTIL CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE WOULD REVIEW AND APPROVE THE RELEASE OF THE DEED RESTRICTION AND THE, UM, NEW STREAM BED ALTERATION AGREEMENT.IT IS NOT AN OPEN-ENDED NEGOTIATION, WHATEVER THEY WANT AND NOT OPEN-ENDED THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SETS, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT BIND THE APPLICANT THAT BIND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE TO PROVIDING FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT OR BETTER HABITAT THAN NOW EXISTS.
WELL, I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT OR BETTER HABITAT THAN WAS REQUIRED TO REPLACE THE IMPACTED HABITAT WHEN THE GOLF COURSE WAS BUILT, THAT DEED RESTRICTION EXISTS BECAUSE WHEN THE GOLF COURSE WAS BUILT FOUR AND A HALF ACRES OF MULE FAT SCRUB HABITAT WAS IMPACTED, AND THAT DEED RESTRICTION MITIGATES IMPACTS FROM THE DISC CONSTRUCTION OF THE GOLF COURSE, THAT MUST BE THAT ORIGINAL MITIGATION MUST BE REPLACED BEFORE ANY GROUND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES TAKE PLACE ON SITE.
THE REQUIREMENT ALSO IS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION FOR ANY OTHER IMPACTS TO HABITAT, TO SENSITIVE HABITATS ON THE SITE THAT PERFORMANCE STANDARD EQUIVALENT HABITAT OR BETTER IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IN THAT JANUARY, 2020 LETTER WAS THE CITY SHOULD IMPOSE THOSE, GIVE US X NUMBER OF ACRES FOR EVERY ACRE YEAH.
AND IN OUR DISCUSSION IN MARCH WITH THE DEPARTMENT, IT IS NOT THE CITY'S PLACE TO IMPOSE ON THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.
WHAT THEY WOULD DETERMINE IS EQUIVALENT OR BETTER HABITAT.
SO THEY HAVE A PERFORMANCE CENTER, THEY WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
IT IS ALSO NOT PURELY OPEN-ENDED AS TO WHERE THAT OFFSITE MITIGATION OR WHERE MITIGATION WOULD OCCUR.
THERE IS A HABITAT CONSERVATION AREA ONSITE AND ADDITIONAL LAND WILL BE PURCHASED OFFSITE AND MITIGATION MEASURES SET FORTH IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.
IN FINALLY, I, OUR VOLUME THREE, STARTING ON PAGE FOUR DASH THREE, IDENTIFY THE POTENTIAL SITES THAT CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT FISH AND WILDLIFE WOULD ACCEPT.
THERE HAS BEEN QUESTIONS IT'S REGARDING THE MAINTENANCE OF THE WESTERN SLOPE, THE SLOPE SEPARATING THE GOLF COURSE FROM THE WEST RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS ISSUE WAS RAISED IN COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR, AND THE RESPONSE TO THAT IS TO BE FOUND IN, UH, FINALLY I R VOLUME THREE, STARTING ON PAGE TWO DASH EIGHT 82.
THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS THAT ACCESS TO THE SLOPES TO PROVIDE AND CAN ONGOING MAINTENANCE WILL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES DURING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION, THAT IS THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT TO THE APPLICANT.
AND THAT WILL BE ENSURED THROUGH THE GRADING PERMIT.
THERE WAS ALSO A MENTION OF THE COTTON SHIRES LETTER AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN GRADING OCCURS.
AND ONE OF THE BUTTRESSES HOLDING THAT SLOPE IN PLACE IS TEMPORARILY REMOVED.
THAT COMMENT LETTER FROM COTTON SHIRES IS PART OF THE FINAL EIR.
THE RESPONSES TO THAT, THAT LETTER START ON PAGE TWO DASH 255 OF THE VOLUME THREE BASED ON REVIEW OF THE COTTON SHIRES LETTER.
IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURE WAS IN FACT REQUIRED TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE SLOPE DURING SITE GRADING, THAT MITIGATION MEASURE G E O DASH 1.4 B IS TO BE FOUND IN A SECTION FOUR OF THE FINALLY IRR VOLUME THREE.
THERE WERE ALSO QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE MANAGEMENT OF THOSE SOILS THAT WERE BURIED WITHIN THE GOLF COURSE, UH, DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL LAHABRA HILLS PROJECT AND THE GOLF COURSE, THE ORIGINAL PLACEMENT AND, AND REMEDIATION OF THE SITE AND THE PLACEMENT OF THAT CONTAMINATED SOIL WAS DONE UNDER THE REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHCARE AGENCY AND THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD.
IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT THE CONCEPT AND THE PROPOSAL THAT THE APPLICANT HAD HAS DISCUSSING.
AND YOU'VE HEARD SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT REBURYING THAT SOIL
[01:15:01]
HAS IN FACT BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHCARE AGENCY.UM, THEY, THE, UH, AGENCY'S APPROVAL AND THE APPENDIX TO THE, AND THE, UH, ADDENDUM TO THAT APPROVAL ARE FOUND IN APPENDIX M OF THE FINAL EIR.
UM, AND I DO WANT TO CORRECT ONE OTHER THING, UH, AND THAT IS THE EIR DID NOT ADDRESS OFFSITE HAULING OF THAT MATERIAL.
AND THE REASON THE EIR DID NOT ADDRESS OFFSITE HAULING OF THAT MATERIAL IS AS I JUST MENTIONED, THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION OR ELSE HEALTHCARE, UH, AGENCY APPROVED THE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN TO REBURY THAT ON SITE, TYPICALLY TAKING CONTAMINATED SOIL AND LOADING IT ONTO TRUCKS AND HAULING IT, THEN UNLOADING IT CREATES, UH, IN MANY CASES, MORE HAZARD THAN BURYING IT AND CAPPING IT IN PLACE.
SO IN THIS CASE, THE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN IS APPROVED BY THE HEALTH CARE AGENCY.
ONE THING THAT WE NOTICED IN REVIEWING THAT APPROVAL IS THAT THERE WAS NOT A QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE HEALTH RISK.
AND SO EVEN RECOGNIZING THAT THE SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN HAD BEEN APPROVED, A MITIGATION MEASURE HAZARD H A Z DASH 2.2 IS ADDED REQUIRING A HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TO DEMONSTRATE THE SAFETY OF THE PLAN APPROVED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHCARE AGENCY AND THE CITY WOULD REVIEW AND APPROVE OR REVIEW THAT.
AND IF THAT HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT MEETS THE APPLICABLE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT ARE THE, UM, BASED ON ONE OF THE HORRIBLE ACRONYMS, OH, WE HA OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.
UM, IF THEY MEET THOSE BASIC STANDARDS BASED ON THEIR GUIDANCE THEN, AND ONLY THEN WOULD THE CITY ISSUE GRADING PERMITS TO ALLOW THAT, UM, ACTION TO TAKE PLACE.
THE LAST THING THAT I WANTED TO, UH, MENTION THERE WERE QUESTIONS REGARDING UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS AND WHAT IT MEANS WHEN AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDS THAT CERTAIN IMPACTS CANNOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS AN INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENT.
IT DOES NOT DICTATE TO YOU WHETHER YOU HAVE TO APPROVE A PROJECT, WHETHER YOU CANNOT APPROVE A PROJECT, IT IS A DISCRETIONARY ACTION THAT IS IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL TONIGHT.
WHAT SEQUENCE DOES REQUIRE YOU TO DO BECAUSE THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IS IF YOU CHOOSE TO APPROVE RANCHO LA HOMBRE, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO BALANCE THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT AGAINST THOSE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND THE APPROVAL AS PART OF ANY APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT, YOU WILL BE ASKED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT'S BENEFITS OUTWEIGH THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
UH, THE, THE LISTING OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, UM, ARE IDENTIFIED IN VOLUME.
ONE OF THE EIR N UH, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STARTING ON PAGE E S SEVEN.
AND THAT WAS, I THINK, EVERYTHING THAT I HAD IN MY NOTES FROM THE TESTIMONY REGARDING THE EIR.
DO MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? CAN I GET YOUR NAME AGAIN? I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME.
I THOUGHT ANDREW HAD INTRODUCED NO, THAT'S OKAY.
LLOYD L L O Y D LAST NAME ZOLA, Z O L A.
I'M WITH THE FIRM OF MEDIS, M E T I S.
WHERE ARE WE? SO AT THIS TIME WE WILL TAKE A RECESS BECAUSE THE NEXT ITEM UP IS WE WILL CALL FOR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND WE WILL GET INTO MAKING THE DECISION THAT EVERYBODY'S BEEN WAITING FOR FOR FIVE YEARS.
SO THIS TIME WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ABOUT A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND RECESS CITY COUNCIL.
NOW IT IS THE TIME TO DISCUSS AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON ALL OF THE VARIOUS LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS AND WHAT ACTION WILL BE TAKING SINCE I'M THERE.
I, UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU MY OPINION AND WHERE I'M GOING TO, HOW MY VOTE IS GOING TO GO WITH THIS.
AND THE REASONS WHY FIRST OFF, I SINCERELY APPRECIATE
[01:20:01]
ALL OF THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING, BOTH IN OF, AND AGAINST THE PROJECT.I ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO ALL THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING IN THIS APPLICATION, LENORE AND THE PROPERTY OWNER HAVE ASKED THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE A MAJOR CHANGE TO THE MOST IMPORTANT LAND USE POLICY DOCUMENT IN OUR CITY, OUR GENERAL PLAN.
THIS PROJECT REQUIRES A LOT OF OTHER APPROVALS AS WELL, BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISION WE HAVE TO MAKE IS WHETHER TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AS A NATION FOR THE GOLF COURSE, PROPERTY FROM OPEN SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION THAT WOULD ALLOW THE PROPOSED HOUSING PROJECT.
IF WE DO NOT VOTE TO MAKE THAT CHANGE, WE CANNOT APPROVE ANY OF THE OTHER PARTS OF THE APPLICATION.
FIRST, I DO BELIEVE THERE IS NO NEED TO GIVE ANY WEIGHT TO THE PETITION SIGNATURES, THE VALIDITY OF THE SIGNATURES, AND WHO SIGNED THE PETITIONS.
THIS IS NOT AN EXERCISE IN COUNTING NOSES AND PETITIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THIS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT IS THE BEST DECISION FOR THE CITY, WHICH WE ARE HERE TO DECIDE AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE, THE TESTIMONY THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED HERE AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, I CANNOT SUPPORT THE REQUESTED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, OPEN SPACE, EVEN PRIVATELY OWNED OPEN SPACE THAT PEOPLE USE FOR PAID RECREATIONAL PURPOSES IS JUST TOO PRECIOUS AND TOO SCARCE FOR US TO TURN OVER.
OUR GENERAL PLAN WAS UPDATED IN 2014, FOLLOWING A PROCESS THAT INCLUDED SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INPUT.
AND THE RESULT WAS A PLAN THAT CONTINUES TO DESIGNATE THIS PROPERTY AS OPEN SPACE IN WHICH DOES NOT ENVISION A RESIDENTIAL USE HERE WHILE I RESPECT THE PROPERTY OWNERS STATEMENTS, THE GOLF COURSE BUSINESS HAS NOT BEEN AS PROFITABLE AS THEY WOULD LIKE PEOPLE ARE STILL PLAYING GOLF AND KEEPING THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN USE DESIGNATION DOES NOT DENY THE PROPERTY OWNERS THE SAME ECONOMICALLY VIABLE USE OF THEIR LAND THAT THEY HAVE ENJOYED.
I UNDERSTAND THAT PARTS OF THE PROPERTY WOULD REMAIN OPEN SPACE, BUT THIS PROJECT WILL, WOULD STILL WOULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF OPEN SPACE AREA IN URBAN ORANGE COUNTY.
I DO NOT THINK THAT IS GOOD FOR THE CITY.
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN EIGHT SECTIONS OF THE EIR, INCLUDING THE TRAFFIC SECTION, WHERE IT SAYS THE PROJECT WOULD MAKE TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE AT EIGHT INTERSECTIONS AND FIVE OTHER AREAS.
SOME OF WHICH ARE NOT EVEN IN OUR CITY, WE SHOULD NOT CREATE MORE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS IN OUR OWN CITIES AND FOR OUR NEIGHBORS FOR A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
THE OTHER REMAINING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE JUST AS SIGNIFICANT.
AND THIS PROJECT DOES NOT BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY ENOUGH TO JUST IGNORE THEM.
WE NEED MORE HOUSING IN THE HARBOR, AND WE NEED ALL RANGES OF HOUSING IN AREAS WHERE DENSE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS APPROPRIATE.
NOT ON SOME OF THE LAST REMAINING OPEN SPACE IN THE CITY.
OUR STAFF TOLD US DURING THE STAFF REPORT THAT THERE ARE OTHER AREAS OF THIS CITY THAT ARE DEVELOPED AND IT WOULD BE SUITABLE TO REPURPOSE FOR HOUSING.
I HOPE THAT HAPPENS, BUT I OPPOSE CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN TO ALLOW THE PROJECT ON IMPORTANT OPEN SPACE LAND.
FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD VOTE TO DENY THE PROPOSED A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AND I WOULD VOTE TO DENY THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF THE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACK MAP, BECAUSE ALL OF THE OTHER REQUESTS OF DECISIONS WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN.
THAT IS MY POSITION COLLEAGUES ROSE.
THE LAST WORDS I REMEMBERED THAT MR. DOLAN SAID WAS TO SEE IF THE BENEFITS OUTWEIGH THE IMPACTS.
AND AS I LISTENED TO THE, I, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO SAY, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE.
I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A LONG, MANY YEARS FOR ALL OF THIS, UH, DEVELOPERS, UH, EVERYONE INVOLVED.
AND, UM, AS WE LOOKED AT THE BINDERS AND ALL I COULD SEE JUST HOW MUCH WORK WAS DONE, UH, FROM ALL ON THIS PART.
SO I, I W I LISTENED TO EVERYONE AND I LISTENED TO HOW SOME OF THEM WOULD SAY THAT THERE WAS A LACK OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITY IN LAHABRA.
AND I RECALL IN 1991, WITH THE HELP OF NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES, HOW I WAS ABLE TO BUY MY HOME, GRANTED IT WASN'T IN THE IDEAL PLACE.
IT WAS IN A LOW-INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD,
[01:25:01]
UH, HAD ITS PROBLEMS. AND, BUT YET, UM, I WAS ABLE TO PUT MY TIME INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TURNED IT AROUND WHERE I SEE SUCH A DIVERSITY IN OUR COMMUNITY NOW, WHERE WE HAVE, UH, UH, FAMILIES, FILIPINO FAMILIES, ROMANIAN FAMILIES, AFRICAN-AMERICAN FAMILIES, VIETNAMESE, FAMILIES, CAUCASIANS.I MEAN, IT'S A DIVERSITY THAT YOU CAN MAKE CHANGE.
SO I, WHILE THEY MAY NOT BE IN THE IDEAL PLACE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE THE HOUSING TO BE, YOU CAN BUY A FIXER UPPER IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND I KNOW THAT WE DO NOT HAVE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE, UM, THE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE LOCATIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO LIVE IN, BUT CHANGE CAN HAPPEN IN OUR COMMUNITY.
THEN IT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE BUY HOMES IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND MAKE THEM DIVERSE.
UM, AS WELL, I AM CONCERNED WITH THE TRAFFIC.
I, I, I KNOW THAT INDIVIDUALS WANTED TO, AS MUCH AS THEY WANT TO, THEY TO FREEZE OUR CITY AND KEEP IT SMALL AND QUAINT, BUT HOUSING WILL BE INEVITABLE.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S JUST A MATTER IF YOU'RE SEEING THE CHANGE.
PEOPLE HAVE SAID IN THE LAST EIGHT, 10 YEARS, I'VE SEEN SO MUCH MORE TRAFFIC, SO MUCH MORE PEOPLE, SO MUCH MORE HOUSING.
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT HOUSING THAT IS BEING BUILT.
UM, YES, THE STATE IS MANDATING FOR US TO BUILD HOUSES.
UM, BUT, UH, THIS PROJECT HERE, I, I WANTED TO, UH, I DON'T BELIEVE IT FULFILLS THE PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING THAT SCAG IS REQUIRING WITH REGARDS TO HIGH INCOME, MODERATE INCOME, UH, LOW INCOME, VERY LOW INCOME.
AND WILL THERE BE INVESTORS THAT WILL BUY THIS, THESE HOUSES INSTEAD OF A WORKFORCE COMMUNITY THAT WILL BUY THESE HOUSES? WILL IT BE IN THEIR RANGE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD THESE HOUSES? UH, THAT'S A CONCERN OF MINE AS WELL.
AND YES, I WAS PART OF THE GENERAL PAD, GEE PAC COMMITTEE AND THE, THE, UH, THE, THE HOURS THAT WE SPEND TO PLAN THE FUTURE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
AND I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT AS WELL AS CHANGING OUR GENERAL PLAN, BUT ALL IN ALL, I AM GOING TO GO ALONGSIDE WITH THE MAYOR AND NOT APPROVE THIS.
THAT WOULD CONCLUDE THAT MR. MAYOR, I HAVE NO COMMENTS.
AND, UH, I'D LIKE TO THANK OUR, UH, OUR CITY STAFF FOR THEIR, FOR THE ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF WORK THEY'VE PUT IN ON THIS OVER THE YEARS.
UH, ANDREW AND, UH, AND EVERYBODY ELSE INVOLVED.
UH, THE, THE, UH, ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS HERE IN OUR PROCEEDINGS FOR THE LAST, UH, THE LAST TWO AND A HALF, THREE NIGHTS, UH, VERY IMPORTANT TO SEE THAT, UH, THAT OUR COMMUNITY AND A, AND A DEVELOPER CAME OUT AND, UH, AND PUT FORTH THEIR BEST EFFORT.
UH, BUT, UH, BY THE SAME TOKEN, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I, A FEW THINGS THAT HAD COME AWAY FROM THIS, UH, ACHIEVING, UH, A GOOD BALANCE OF, UH, OF RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES IS KEY, UH, TO, UH, TO A DECISION LIKE THIS AND DO CONTINUE TO KEEP, UH, THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE HAVE HERE IN LA HABRA, UM, UH, QUALITY OF LIFE, WHERE OUR CARING COMMUNITY CAN THRIVE, UH, AND HAVING PUT IN COUNTLESS AMOUNT OF HOURS OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, READING ALL OF THE EIRS AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION EVERYTHING THAT'S COME BEFORE US, UH, EVEN PRIOR TO THE, UH, UH, PRIOR TO OUR HEARINGS HERE, BUT IN READING ALL OF THOSE BINDERS.
AND, UH, I TELL YOU IT WAS, UH, MANY, UH, WEEKENDS, UH, BUT, UH, WITH THAT, UM, I DON'T THINK THIS PROJECT IS THE BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY, UH, BUT, UH, WITH, WITH THE CAVEAT THAT, UH, UH, LA HARBOR IS STILL GROWING, PEOPLE DO WANT TO LIVE HERE AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS A HOUSING ISSUE SOME POINT IN TIME, UH, WHETHER THOSE RENA NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY OR NOT.
UH, I'M NOT, UH, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT'S GOING TO GO.
UH, BUT, UH, WITH, UH, MANY OF THE, UH, THE INGREDIENTS PER FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM OR WORD, UH, IN, IN THE EIR, UH, I, UH, I JUST DIDN'T FIND IT, UH, UH, COMPELLING ENOUGH, UH, TO CHANGE, UH, THE, UH, THE ZONING UP THERE, UH, FOR, UH, FOR OPEN SPACE AND, UH, TO THE, UH, TO THE HOMEOWNER, EXCUSE ME, TO THE LANDOWNER, THE KWAN FAMILY RESPECTFULLY, UH, HOPEFULLY GOING FORWARD, UH, AS A, AS A CITY, WE CAN, NOW WE CAN HELP YOUR BUSINESS THRIVE.
UH, I, UH, I MAKE IT QUITE, UH, QUITE A BIG PART OF MY, OF MY MISSION HERE IN THE CITY TO HELP ALL BUSINESSES THRIVE.
AND, UH, AND I, I WILL PUT MY BEST FOOT FORWARD FOR THAT AS WELL, AND FOR ANY BUSINESS HERE IN THE CITY, BUT, UH, FOR THOSE REASONS, UH, I WON'T BE ABLE TO
[01:30:01]
SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.NOW I'LL CONFER WITH STAFF ON THIS.
SO BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE HEARD, I THINK THE FIRST THING TO DO WOULD BE, DO A MOTION TO JEANETTE AND I, THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, CORRECT.
UH, MAYOR THOSE ACTIONS WILL HAVE TO BE TAKEN BY RESOLUTION.
SO THE, THE APPROPRIATE MOTION WOULD BE TO DIRECT STAFF, TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION, DENYING THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, UM, AND ALL, AND DENY THE TENTATIVE, UH, THE VESTING OF THE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP.
AND SO WE WOULD ASSUMING ASSUMING THAT CARRIES, WE WILL BRING THOSE RESOLUTIONS BACK TO YOU AT YOUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
CAN WE DO THEM AT THE SAME TIME OR ONE AT A TIME, YOU CAN DO THEM EITHER WAY.
WHICHEVER IS PREFERABLE TO YOU.
AND MY EMOTION IS THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO BRING BACK A RESOLUTION TO DENY THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1801 TO CHANGE THE LAND, USE DESIGNATION FROM OPEN SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL, BOTH BY FAMILY, ONE 15 TO 24 UNITS PER ACRE FOR PLANNING AREA ONE LOW DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL ZERO TO EIGHT UNITS, AN ACRE FOR PLANNING AREAS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR, AND TO MIXED USE ONE FOR PLANNING AREA FIVE OF THE RANCHO ABRA SPECIFIC PLAN.
IN ADDITION, WE WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF TO BRING A RESOLUTION, TO DENY THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF INVESTING TENTATIVE TRACK MAP 17, EIGHT 45 AT 1400 SOUTH LAHABRA BOLO LA HARBOR HILLS DRIVE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I THINK ROSE BEACH AT ROSEANNE SECOND BY ROSE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL MAYOR BEAMISH YES.
COUNCIL MEMBER SHAW ABSTAIN COUNCIL MEMBER MAGENTO.
SO AGAIN, AS MY COLLEAGUES AND THEN, AND I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, ALL LEVELS OF STAFF HAVE DONE, ESPECIALLY AT OUR CITY MANAGER, JIM SADRO, ANDREW, ROY, ALL YOUR ASSISTANTS THAT HAVE HELPED YOU ALONG THE WAY IT'S BEEN CHALLENGING.
IT'S BEEN A LONG FIVE YEARS FOR MANY OF YOU, SO WE WILL SOMEWHERE.
THERE'S NO CONSIDERATIONS AT THIS TIME.
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, THE MAYOR'S COMMUNITY CALENDAR, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAS CREATED A COLOR-CODED SYSTEM WITH CRITERIA FOR LOOSENING OR TIGHTENING RESTRICTIONS ON ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.
DUE TO COVID-19 ORANGE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY IN THE RED TIER, WHICH MEANS SOME NON-ESSENTIAL BUSINESSES MAY RESUME INDOOR BUSINESS OPERATIONS, SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS.
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BLUEPRINT FOR SAFETY ECONOMY, PLEASE VISIT CALIFORNIA'S COVID-19 WEBSITE AT COVID-19 DOT CA.GOV.
WEBSITE INCLUDES A SEARCH TOOL THAT ALLOWS YOU TO LEARN THE STATUS, THE SPECIFIC COUNTIES AND ECONOMIC SECTORS I'D IMAGINE EVERYBODY HAS THAT MEMORIZED BY NOW.
ALTHOUGH IT APPEARS WE'RE COLLECTIVELY MAKING PROGRESS ON OUR FIGHT AGAINST THE CORONAVIRUS OR A MEMBER TO STAY INFORMED, DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO HELP SLOW THE SPREAD.
THE CDC, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH THAN THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH AGENCY.
REMIND EACH OF US THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL SIMPLE ACTIONS WE CAN TAKE THAT CAN MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE OR WASH YOUR HANDS THOROUGHLY AND FREQUENTLY WITH SOAP OR USE AN ALCOHOL-BASED SANITIZER, COVERING YOUR MOUTH, THE NOSE WHEN COUGHING OR SNEEZING, AND AVOID TOUCHING YOUR EYES, NOSE, AND MOUTH CLEAN AND DISINFECT FREQUENTLY TOUCHED SURFACES.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE VISIT THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH AGENCY WEBSITE@OCCHEALTHINFO.COM.
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COVID-19 PAGE AGAIN AT COVID-19 DOT CA.GOV OR THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL WEBSITE@CDC.GOV COVID-19 CAN SPREAD EASILY FROM PERSON TO PERSON AND BECAUSE IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE COVID-19 AND YET DISPLAY NO OBVIOUS SYMPTOMS. THE SIMPLE ACT OF WEARING A MASK IN PUBLIC CAN HELP SLOW THE SPREAD OF THE DISEASE WHERE I'M ASKING ANY INDOOR PUBLIC SPACE.
WHEN WAITING IN LINE, WHEN USING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OR A RIDE SHARING SERVICE AT WHEN THEY'RE OTHERS ARE MOVING THROUGH COMMON AREAS AND OUTDOORS, IF YOU CAN'T
[01:35:01]
MAINTAIN A SOCIAL DISTANCE OF SIX FEET FROM OTHERS, IF EVERYONE WEARS THE MASK, WE ARE ALL BETTER PROTECTED FROM COVID-19 OR MORE INFORMATION ON MASKS.PLEASE VISIT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COVID-19 PAGE@COVIDNINETEEN.CA.GOV CITY HALL.
THE LIBRARY POLICE STATION LOBBY AND THE COMMUNITY CENTER FRONT DESK ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, BUT ALL OTHER CITY FACILITIES ARE STILL CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.
PUBLIC PARKS ARE OPEN FOR PASSIVE USE AND VISITORS, AND THEY ALSO VISIT PARK PLAYGROUNDS, BUT SPORTS CARTS, SPORT SPORTS COURTS, AND ESCAPE PARK REMAIN CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE IS THAT UP-TO-DATE GYM.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT AS ALWAYS CITY SKATE PARKS ARE OPEN, OKAY.
AND WITH MODIFIED RULES AND WE HAVE SIGNS UP.
SO MOST SKATEBOARDERS THAT ARE OUT THERE, OUR SKATE PARK IS OPEN, BUT PLEASE, TO MAKE THIS WORK, READ THE SIGNS, FOLLOW THE RULES, AND WE'LL ALL BE GOOD AS ALWAYS CITY OPERATIONS CONTINUE, AND STAFF IS AVAILABLE BY PHONE OR EMAIL FOR THOSE WHO WISH NOT TO COME TO CITY HALL.
IF WE DO VISIT A CITY FACILITY, PLEASE REMEMBER TO WEAR A FACE, A FACE MASK, WEAR A MASK OR A FACE COVERING FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CALL (562) 383-4010, OR VISIT US ONLINE@LAHABRACA.GOV OR FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER.
AND IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD, THE 2020 ELECTION IS BRINGING MANY NEW CHALLENGES TO THE WAY ELECTIONS ARE CONDUCTED.
VOTERS NOW HAVE SEVERAL CONVENIENT METHODS TO CAST THEIR VOTE, INCLUDING BUILDING FROM HOME BY MAIL AND BALLOT, DROPPING THEIR BALLOT OFF AT ANY SECURE BALLOT DROP BOX OR BY VOTING IN PERSON AT ANY DESIGNATED VOTING CENTER IN ORANGE COUNTY.
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER OF VOTERS SENT VOTE BY MAIL BALLOTS TO EACH REGISTERED VOTER.
THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 5TH, TO VOTE BY A MALE VOTERS NEED ONLY MARK THEIR BALLOT, FOLLOWING THEIR PRINTED INSTRUCTIONS ON THE BALLOT SHEET, THEN RETURN IT TO THE REGISTER OF VOTERS IN THE ENCLOSED PASTES POSTAGE PAID ENVELOPE.
A VOTER MAY ALSO CHOOSE TO DEPOSIT HIS OR HER COMPLETED BALLOT AT ANY BALLOT DROP BOX IN ORANGE COUNTY OR IN THE EVENT OF VOTER WISHES TO CAST HIS OR HER VOTE IN PERSON.
THEY MAY VISIT ANY ORANGE COUNTY VOTE CENTER.
GONE ARE THE DAYS OF VOTERS BEING ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC POLLING LOCATION, DETERMINED BY ADDRESS TO LEARN MORE, INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF VOTING CENTERS AND DROP BOXES HERE IN THE HARBOR AND THROUGHOUT ORANGE COUNTY, PLEASE VISIT THE REGISTER OF VOTERS WEBSITE@OSIVOTE.COM.
AND BEFORE YOU VOTE, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU BECOME AS KNOWLEDGEABLE AS YOU CAN ABOUT THE ISSUES.
EVERYTHING IN THIS ELECTION IS VERY IMPORTANT IN THE STATE AND IN THE NATION AS A WHOLE, AND EVEN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
I MEAN, I KNOW IT TAKES SOME TIME TO, TO BECOME EDUCATED A LOT OF THESE EDGES AND THESE ISSUES, BUT IT WILL HELP THE COMMUNITY.
SADRO GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE LAST THREE DAYS HAVE BEEN, UM, UM, A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING WITH COVID TO BE ABLE TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE SIZE THAT WE CONDUCTED IN A WAY THAT WE COULD ACCOMMODATE, UH, THE, UM, APPLICANTS, UH, THEIR TEAM, AND THEN THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OR AGAINST THE PROJECT.
AND I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK OF OUR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THEY CAME OUT IN FORCE TO HELP SET UP, UH, I WOULD SAY AN UNPRECEDENTED EFFORT ON OUR PART.
WE'VE NEVER DONE SOMETHING LIKE WHAT YOU'VE SEEN THE LAST FEW DAYS WITH SETTING UP OUR ENTIRE PARKING LOT FOR OVER 200 PEOPLE.
WE'RE UP TO 200 PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SIT DOWN, UH, SAFELY, UH, WITH THE PANDEMIC AND BE ABLE TO, TO WATCH AND ENGAGE IN THE, IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AND BE ABLE TO COME IN AND MAKE COMMENTS TO A COUNCIL IN PERSON IN A WAY THAT'S SAFE FOR THEM, SAY FOR COUNSEL, SAY FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
UH, AND I, AND I KIND OF, UH, UM, WAS SPEAKING WITH OUR COMMUNITY SERVICES, DIRECTOR, KELLY, UH FUJIO AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD TO CANCEL EVERY MAJOR SPECIAL EVENT THIS YEAR, 4TH OF JULY AND ALL THEIR FESTIVALS.
AND, AND THEY TOOK ON THIS PROJECT.
LIKE IT WAS, UH, IT WAS A MAJOR EVENT FOR THE CITY AND, UH, THEY DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB AND THEY HAD A NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS, OUR CERT TEAM, UH, WHO ARE VOLUNTEER RESIDENTS CAME OUT TO HELP.
WE HAD MEMBERS OF THE LIONS CLUB.
WE HAD OTHER VOLUNTEERS FROM LOCAL BUSINESSES JUST TO COME OUT AND HELP MAKE SURE EVERYBODY WAS SAFE.
SO I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK, OUR CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, CITY, UH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF, A REAL TEAM EFFORT.
[01:40:01]
SO APPRECIATE THEIR HARD WORK OR THIS WOULDN'T HAVE COME OFF THE WAY IT DID AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THIS.WE WILL GO TO COUNCIL COMMENTS, COUNCIL MEMBER OF A DRAMA.
I HAVE A FEW THINGS TO BRING BEFORE, UH, BEFORE OUR CITY COUNCIL, UH, FIRST, UH, I'D LIKE TO, UH, ADDRESS, UH, THE, UH, THE RECENT REVELATION OF THE AUDIO OF, UH, OF COUNCIL MEMBER, TIM SHAW IN HIS CAPACITY AS A PROFESSOR AT RIO HONDO CITY COLLEGE TO ITS GOVERNMENT CLASS.
UM, I WILL SAY THE DISPARAGING REMARKS OF CITY COUNCIL.
UH, BUT UH, HIS REMARKS OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICIALS IS UNPROFESSIONAL UNBECOMING.
ALTHOUGH WE MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE, UH, WITH OUR POLICE ASSOCIATION FOR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ISSUES.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU, YOU DON'T UNDERMINE THEM.
UH, AND THE VITAL JOB THEY PROVIDE FOR OUR CITY AND RESIDENTS, MOST SHOCKING TO ME AND DISRESPECTING ARE THE COMMENTS MADE ABOUT OUR RESIDENTS AND BELITTLING THEIR EFFORTS IN EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
OUR RESIDENTS VOTED US INTO OFFICE TO LOOK AFTER THEM AND OUR CITY, THEY WILL BE DOING SO AGAIN ON NOVEMBER 3RD.
AND THERE'LL BE DOING IN FUTURE ELECTIONS AS WELL.
I'M OF THE MINDSET THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER, TIM SCHOTT SHOULD RESIGN.
I'LL TELL YOU AT LEAST SOCIAL MEDIA, OVER 16,600 VIEWS ON THIS AUDIO, OR WE'RE SEEING A AND A AND TWO COMMENTS STICK OUT TO ME.
AND, UH, AGAIN, THIS IS NOTHING PERSONAL.
UH, BUT AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, TWO COMMENTS STUCK OUT.
ONE OF THEM, UH, WAS A REFERENCE TO FIVE POLITICIANS WHO COULD BE BOUGHT OFF BY DEVELOPERS.
AND THERE WAS A VERBS BEFORE AND AFTER THAT.
AND THE INDICATION THAT THE PROJECT VOTE WAS GOING TO GO A CERTAIN WAY, UH, THIS PROJECT.
SO THE QUESTION WILL ALWAYS REMAIN, DID TIM SEAN KNOW SOMETHING? DID HE NOT? UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S THE QUESTION PEOPLE HAVE.
AND I FEEL THAT A LOT OF INQUIRIES THROUGHOUT THE LAST WEEK AND A HALF, AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS I'D LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF IN AN EFFORT, UH, FOR US AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH THE, UH, THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE AND TO LET THEM KNOW THAT, UH, THE TRANSPARENCY IS, IS SOMETHING THAT WE VALUE AND THEIR TRUST IN US.
I'D LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF, UH, TO, UH, UH, TO COME UP WITH A LETTER, UH, TO THE ORANGE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CITING THE AUDIO AND THE LINK AND ASKING THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO WEIGH IN ON THE MATTER, IN AN EFFORT TO CLARIFY AND INVESTIGATE FOR ANY POSSIBLE, UH, VIOLATION CRIMINAL MATTER, WHATEVER RELATED TO THE COMMENTS MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHAW.
AND THAT THE COMMENTS AS I HAD ALREADY STATED BEFORE, AND I'D LIKE STAFF, IF POSSIBLE, TO BRING THOSE TO US, UH, BY OUR NEXT MEETING ON NOVEMBER 2ND, UH, ANOTHER IS, UH, A LETTER TO THE FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION.
THE FPPC CITING THE AUDIO ON THE LINK AND ASKING THE MATTER TO BE INVESTIGATED, UH, AND TO BRING US THAT WITHIN THE NEXT 30 TO 45 DAYS.
SO I'D LIKE, UH, I'D LIKE SOME DIRECTION ON THAT.
UM, AND, UH, UH, BOTH OF THE LETTERS AND I'LL, AND I'LL EMPHASIZES AGAIN.
AND, AND, AND THIS IS FOR OUR RESIDENTS THAT ARE WATCHING TONIGHT.
THESE ARE TO LET OUR RESIDENTS KNOW THAT WE ARE LISTENING AND WE ARE TRANSPARENT IN CARRYING OUT OUR ELECTED DUTIES AND ALERT EACH ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES TO ALSO SUPPORT MY EFFORT BECAUSE IT BEHOOVES YOU, AND THIS IS A REFLECTION ON YOU.
WELL, EACH ONE OF US AND DO SEND FORTH THESE LETTERS SO THAT RESIDENTS LAHABRA CAN SEE THAT WE STAND FOR TRANSPARENCY TO OUR RESIDENTS.
I WILL TELL YOU, HOLD US EACH ACCOUNTABLE.
YOU NEED TO HOLD US EACH ACCOUNTABLE AND REMEMBER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY EVER HAVE OF WHAT WE'RE SPENDING OF WHAT MONEY WE'RE TAKING.
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ANY OF THAT.
YOU CAN ALWAYS, ALWAYS LOOK TO OUR, UH, OUR CITY CLERK AND ASK HER AND MAKE THE REQUEST FOR ANY OF OUR POLITICAL FORUMS THAT IS NEVER, NEVER AN ISSUE FOR ME.
AND I'M SURE IT'S NEVER AN ISSUE FOR ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES, BUT THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO, THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AFTER.
UM, SO I'LL, I'LL PUT THAT BEFORE STAFF, UH, AND IF, UH, IF I CAN GET SUPPORT ON THAT FROM ANYONE OR, OR A FEW OF MY COLLEAGUES, IF THERE IS A SECOND REQUIRED, I WILL SECOND IT, THANK YOU.
UH, AND, UH, LASTLY, UM, AGAIN, I THANK, UH, STAFF AND I TOO WOULD LIKE TO THANK KELLY FOOD, JO, AND, UH, AND HER, UH, HER PEOPLE AS WELL FOR, UH, FOR PUTTING THIS EVENT ON, UH, THIS LAST WEEK, UH, VERY IMPORTANT AND, UH, MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU FOR BEING A CARING COMMUNITY.
[01:45:03]
OKAY.WELL, TAKE A MOMENT TO, UM, UH, SPEAK OF THIS AUDIO.
UM, THIS, THERE WAS A RECORDING MADE, UH, AT MY PLACE OF WORK OVER A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
THIS AUDIO WAS HIGHLY EDITED AND CAST ME IN A FALSE LIGHT, UH, SECRETLY RECORDING A TEACHER IN HIS CLASS, AUDITING, EDITING THE AUDIO AND POSTING IT ONLINE IN AN ATTEMPT TO DAMAGE THE TEACHER'S REPUTATION AS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF COLLEGE POLICY.
UM, THE SUBSEQUENT USE OF THIS DOCTORATE AUDIO CAN ONLY BE DESCRIBED AS HARASSMENT AND BULLYING PEOPLE OF GOODWILL, GOODWILL EVERYWHERE SHOULD DENOUNCE THESE TACTICS OF SECRETLY RECORDING A COUNCIL MEMBER AT HIS OR HER WORKPLACE AS TOLERATED.
WHAT OTHER TACTICS MIGHT BE ALLOWED AND RESORTED TO.
UH, HAVING SAID THAT I REGRET THE WORDS I SAID A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, I'VE APOLOGIZED IN PRIVATE TO, UH, THOSE INDIVIDUALS.
AND I WILL APOLOGIZE HERE PUBLICLY TO ANYONE WHO WAS OFFENDED BY, UM, MY POOR CHOICE OF WORDS A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK STAFF AGAIN FOR ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US FOR THE LAST THREE DAYS OF THE COUNCIL MEETING.
UM, I, I KNOW HOW MUCH HARD WORK IT WAS, I ALL AROUND AND, UH, ALSO THE COMMUNITY SERVICE, UH, DEPARTMENT FOR ALL THE SETTING UP AS MAYOR, AS THE CITY MANAGER SAID.
UH, AND I JUST APPRECIATE ALL MY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I KNOW THAT, UH, WE SOMETIMES DISAGREE, BUT WE TRY TO BE CIVIL.
I ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO TAKE ETHICS TRAINING CLASS.
WE HAVE TO TAKE HARASSMENT EVERY YEAR.
AND SO I'M ALWAYS REMINDED OF THAT.
AND I TRY TO BE AS CAREFUL AS POSSIBLE TO RESPECT ALL MY COLLEAGUES ON THE COUNCIL AND TO RESPECT THE STAFF AS WELL, BUT THAT THAT'S NOT HARD TO DO BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE AWESOME.
SO, UM, THAT WOULD INCLUDE MY REPORT.
UM, I GUESS I HAVE A COUPLE OF WAYS TO GO WITH THIS FIRST.
I RESPECT ROSE AND JOSE WITH REGARDS TO WANTING DIRECTING STAFF TO GO TO THE DA WITH A LETTER AND THE FEEL OF FAIR POLITICALLY PRACTICES ACT.
I BELIEVE THERE'S NO ISSUE THERE AND I UNDERSTAND THE TRANSPARENCY.
SO I WOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT THOSE LETTERS TO COME BACK THAT THERE IS NO ISSUE.
I WOULD SAY, HOWEVER, THAT IN MY MIND, AND I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN THINKING OF THIS FOR A WEEK THAT I ACKNOWLEDGED TIM MADE A HURTFUL MISTAKE, AND IT WAS DISAPPOINTING TO HEAR THE TAPE 10 CAME TO ME AND IT HAS APOLOGIZED FOR THE THINGS HE SAID.
I HAVE KNOWN TIM FOR MANY YEARS AND HE HAS SERVED THE CITY HONORABLY THE PAST 12 YEARS.
I PERSONALLY CAN FORGIVE HIS ERROR AND JUDGMENT.
I BELIEVE IT WAS AN ISOLATED INCIDENT.
I KNOW WE ON THE COUNCIL MAY DISAGREE ON POLICY ISSUES, BUT WE MUST, WE MUST RESPECT AND BE CIVIL WITH EACH OTHER AND RESPECT THE COMMUNITY WE SERVE AT ALL TIMES.
IT HAS BEEN SAD TO SEE THE NEGATIVE RESULTS THAT TAPE IS HAVING ON OUR CARING COMMUNITY OF LAHABRA.
WELL, HARBOR VOTERS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO VOTE AND HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON WHETHER TIM SHOULD CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE AND REMAIN A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
I TRUST OUR COMMUNITY TO MAKE A REASONABLE AND SOUND DECISION BASED ON THE TOTALITY OF HIS COUNCIL, VOLUNTEER AND CHURCH SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY VERSUS THIS ONE NEGATIVE INCIDENT.
I AM JUST HERE TO SAY HOW I FEEL AS HIS COLLEAGUE AND HAVING KNOWN HIM FOR MANY YEARS, ROBIN SHARMA FORGIVENESS IS NOT APPROVING WHAT HAPPENED.
IT'S CHOOSING TO RISE ABOVE IT.
I WOULD JUST ASK EVERYONE TO TAKE A MOMENT.
THEY TEND TO NOT BE PUT OUT THERE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT, UH, THE VOTERS WILL VOTE IN TWO WEEKS.
SO, UH, WE SHOULD WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY BELIEVES IN TIM.
AND HE IS REELECTED THAN HE IS REELECTED.
AND THAT SHOULD BE AT THE END OF IT.
HOWEVER, OUT OF THIS NOW IS THAT I DID HAVE A THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL, THAT I WOULD LIKE DIRECT STAFF MYSELF AS MY COLLEAGUES MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW.
WE DO NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL CODE OF CONDUCT WITHIN THE CITY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I THINK AGAIN, FOR AT LEAST TRANSPARENCY OR A WAY TO, UH, HANDLE THESE ISSUES IS IT, WE DIRECT STAFF TO COME
[01:50:01]
BACK WITH A COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO CENSOR OR AT LEAST DISCUSS, UH, IF THERE WAS INAPPROPRIATE, INAPPROPRIATE ACTION IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD HOPE NOT.I HAVE BEEN, AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, THIS IS MY, I HAVE FOUR MEETINGS LEFT AND I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THIS ON A HIGH NOTE.
I'VE ALWAYS RESPECTED ALL MY COLLEAGUES STARTING FROM STEVE SIMONIAN, STEVE ANDERSON, UH, JUAN GARCIA, YOU KNOW, I TOOK ONE GARCIA C LONG TIME AGO, 16 YEARS AGO, AND I'VE TRIED TO EMULATE WHAT ONE, HOW JUAN GARCIA OPERATED, HOPEFULLY HE'S, YOU KNOW, PROUD OF ME WHAT I'VE DONE FOR THE CITY.
UH, AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN DISAPPOINTING, BUT I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS AND WE WILL.
SO HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK WE'RE ABOUT TO ADJOURN.
SO THE MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED TO OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING, WHICH IS WHAT NOVEMBER 2ND CLERK, MR. MAYOR, DO YOU NEED A SECOND TO ON THAT, UH, ETHICS CODE OR THE CODE AND THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ARE RECOMMENDING TO STAFF? I WOULD SECOND IT, IF YOU THANK YOU MONDAY, LET'S SAY WE'RE GONE.
WE'RE A JOURNEY TO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2ND, 2020 AT 5:30 PM.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER CLOSED SESSION ROOM ONE 12 C 100 EAST LAHABRA BOULEVARD FOLLOWED BY THE REGULAR MEETING AT 6:30 PM IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER.
BEFORE I HIT THE GAVEL, I WOULD THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, I THINK TWO YEARS FOR JOSE.
BUT AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW, THE STIFF STAFF PUTS IN A WHOLE LOT MORE WORK THAN WE DO, BUT WE SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME REVIEWING THE EIR AND ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND LETTERS AND ALL THAT AND JOB WELL DONE.