A DIFFERENT VIEW...

FROM WITHIN THE GUARDED WALLS
by InsiderSpider

Another Council meeting has come and gone.

There was a lot of buzz about the proposed Senior Housing by a "Non-Profit" developer. Barney hit the nail on the head again with his "Your a bunch of Crooked Buzzards" comments and the regular folks that try to make the voters aware were trying to make them aware again.

The thing is with all the hoop-la over the Senior Housing the real story slipped under the noses of everybody in the chambers. The Dodson house. City Manager, Tom Schwab asked for approval of the check register and Council Miller and Councilwoman Cortez reclused themselves.

WHY?

Mr. Millers wife does work for Terra Loma Reality. Councilwoman Cortez worked part-time for them. The check in question was for $416,000 for the Dodson house. Remember when people were trying to get the Council to be honest about their closed sessions on real estate deals? Well here's why.

The Schwab and the Council and Gene Carlstrom, the owner of Terra Loma Reality and a former City Councilman went into closed session to negotiate for the Dodson property. Now tell me where in Grand Terrace you can buy a large two story house with three acres for $416,000. You can't. You can buy it for $1,200,000. That's one million two hundred thousand.

So why would the Council tell us they only paid $416,000? From what we learned from sources inside city hall, who are either afraid or worried, that when the boom is lowered they don't want to go down with the rest of them. We were aware of the purchase price from the night the deal was made. We know Councilman Hilkey was furious at what was paid for a piece of property the city didn't need and was done it appears for the Friend of (some) of the Council, Mr. Carlstrom.

Now remember Mr. Millers wife and Councilwoman Cortez do or did work for Carlstrom. Mr. Miller voted for the purchase as did Council Woman Cortes. Mr. Hilkey did not. The deal was done in 15 minutes that night and Mayor Ferre came out of the closed session and said "no deal had been done". What would you call a statement like that?

Now why lie to us and underestimate our intelligence. The reason being is the Schwab and the four Council members that voted for it don't want the voters to know they squandered 1.2 million dollars of tax payer money for a member of the group that makes up the Friends of the Council. They are going to bring it back over the next few meeting and have it approved in increments. $400,000 here $400,000 there.

They figure it won't sound as bad as $1,200,000 and they won't have to answer questions.It's almost comical that Miller and Cortez gave the appearance of being so righteous to not partake of the vote to approve the check but they voted for the deal in closed session.

If this is not corruption then there isn't any anywhere. Do you get it folks. They lied about doing the deal. They lied about having to tell us about the deal. The deal was done for a former Council Member as a favor for property the city has no use for. The source tells us that Carlstrom has been involved in other deals with redevelopment houses that padded his pockets and thinned up the tax payers. Now they are lying about what they paid for it. Lets all go to City Hall and demand to see all the check registers. So watch folks, let's see them squirm out of this one. The real story tonight was not the Senior Housing, the real story was the slimmy deal for the Dodsons property.

Wake up. Demand an explanation from Schwab and Carlstrom and the four council people that voted for it. It should be good to watch the Schwab lie his way out of this one. Are you listening P.E. and Sun. Where are your investigative reporters. Now here's the rub. The Dodsons were reportedly asking $750,000 for their property. So either somebody in the negotiations on the Cities side is an idiot or Carlstrom is a genius. To be able to get your friends to pay $450,000 more than what your asking is just unbelievable, isn't it.

Demand to know how the CRA will spend the required appropriation for Low and Middle Income Housing which this transaction obligates the CRA to spend. Tents for the Day laborers at the Big Box Store the Mayor Said she was against when she ran. Tents for the low wage workers at Lowes, and the OAC? IF the City/CRA made the DEVELOPER pay for the land there would not be a CRA/City Obligation. The Developer won't pay up front because the PLAN is not as it was "Presented". They would rather finance the private development with public funds.

This came by email... thanks insiderspider...