You Should Know:
Alternatives to Jacobsen Family Holdings Action Exist:
The owners of Grand Terrace Shopping Center, home of Stater Bros., have offered to build a larger Stater Bros. store at the current location, while keeping the current store open for business. The shopping center is at the heart of the town’s commercial district will feature turrets, outdoor seating areas, limestone façade trim & trellises with flowers. The extensive façade improvements and landscaping will reflect the character of Grand Terrace, and it’s centrally located and successful retail complex at the main street corner of Barton Road and Mt. Vernon.
Jacobsen's 3rd Mailer Still suggests NO other Option exists:
Notice:
Grossly Misleading Picture of what the Building is supposed to look like is now not being shown as an inducement. That is an improvement.
To State the Grand Terrace Town Center by Jacobsen Family Holdings is the ONLY Road to Progress is a streatch of logic. It is actually an attempt to prejudice your and the councils ability to make a fair assesment of the plans and rights of other options, and individual rights.
There is still a bit of effort to misguide the Public in thinking that the Jacobsen Plan provides a 7500 foot Public Library for FREE. The Library space is apparently being built on the HOPE that the City will find Money to pay for the rent or lease and operation of a Library 3xs the size of the currently Library operated by the County. To operate the current library, the county does not pay rent, and the City provides funds, and the community provide funds and people.
Now, where is the money going to come from for the LIBRARY, LEASE, and Utilities, and the Increased Operational Costs, IF the LIBRARY is Built. Of course if the County and City can't move into the "Library" the building will be put to some other use. Who knows what that alternative will be.
Tha Mailer makes effort to Scare the citizens into supporting one development plan over the other plan. A development is a development. Income is only relevant to the Costs which will be off set by that income. Bringing Transient Shoppers and other Transient Traffic, to town for an increase in sales tax, will most likely cost the city more than the sales tax provided. Increased crime, Increased, traffic and street repairs, Increased problems for the citizens in general.
The Mailer goes to great effort to appeal to the greed of homeowners. Sure your home prices will go up along with increasing property values. That is so wonderful, you will be able to increase your loans on your houses, have rents increase, and require more and more families to have longer commutes to work in order to pay for increased debts, and rents. Children are being harmed by the lack of parenting in this community. Higher and Higher Property Values and Personal and Civic Debt is not a good thing for the family or the city.
The Mailer suggests that their plan is the Only way to develop the property, and that the Income from Stater Brothers is going to increase significantly if it is located in their development, and not in a redeveloped store in its current space. This is strange logic. Would we spend more at Staters if it was a few yards down the street? I don't think so.
The Mailer suggests that their plan would provide More Income for the city than any other Development. In order to prove this the Jacobsen Family Holdings would have to submit real projections of not only their Plan, and other options as a comparison.
Included in a fair comparison should be the aesthetic Design, the Types of Businesses being brought to town, the overall effect on the town, (including not stealing away an existing store to move it down the road, just to leave an empty building).
So friends don't be taken in by half, or in this case less than half of the truth. EVEN IF there will be sales tax revenue to provide for more 2 more police officers, will that be sufficient to meet the increased need for police caused by the nature of the development being proposed. Perhaps an alternative plan would not invite increased criminal activity, or it would invite less criminal or anti social behaviors. This requires an informed comparison of plans. This requires information, not sloganisms.
Again, the FIRST and foremost Issue here is not what get Built it is BY who is it going to be built. Will the City USE Eminent Domain to Force some one OFF of their Land, and sell it to a Developer?
Second, will the Planned Development and new stores, shops and offices be good for Grand Terrace, in the NET assessment, not the Gross. IF for example there is more crime brought to Grand Terrace by the development, than the revenue it brings will compensate for, the NET would be a Negative.
If the Gross is a Billion Bucks, but the cost to the city is Two Billion, it is not a good deal for the city, and it is wrong to report only the Income, and not the Costs to the City, when making a presentation of the information.
To use the Power of the City and Redevelopment Agency this way is WRONG. Jacobsen Family Holdings should be shown to the end of town, along with the City Staff who have put this "Deal" on the Agenda in the First Place.
There is still a bit of effort to misguide the Public in thinking that the Jacobsen Plan provides a 7500 foot Public Library for FREE. The Library space is apparently being built on the HOPE that the City will find Money to pay for the rent or lease and operation of a Library 3xs the size of the currently Library operated by the County. To operate the current library, the county does not pay rent, and the City provides funds, and the community provide funds and people.
Now, where is the money going to come from for the LIBRARY, LEASE, and Utilities, and the Increased Operational Costs, IF the LIBRARY is Built. Of course if the County and City can't move into the "Library" the building will be put to some other use. Who knows what that alternative will be.
Tha Mailer makes effort to Scare the citizens into supporting one development plan over the other plan. A development is a development. Income is only relevant to the Costs which will be off set by that income. Bringing Transient Shoppers and other Transient Traffic, to town for an increase in sales tax, will most likely cost the city more than the sales tax provided. Increased crime, Increased, traffic and street repairs, Increased problems for the citizens in general.
The Mailer goes to great effort to appeal to the greed of homeowners. Sure your home prices will go up along with increasing property values. That is so wonderful, you will be able to increase your loans on your houses, have rents increase, and require more and more families to have longer commutes to work in order to pay for increased debts, and rents. Children are being harmed by the lack of parenting in this community. Higher and Higher Property Values and Personal and Civic Debt is not a good thing for the family or the city.
The Mailer suggests that their plan is the Only way to develop the property, and that the Income from Stater Brothers is going to increase significantly if it is located in their development, and not in a redeveloped store in its current space. This is strange logic. Would we spend more at Staters if it was a few yards down the street? I don't think so.
The Mailer suggests that their plan would provide More Income for the city than any other Development. In order to prove this the Jacobsen Family Holdings would have to submit real projections of not only their Plan, and other options as a comparison.
Included in a fair comparison should be the aesthetic Design, the Types of Businesses being brought to town, the overall effect on the town, (including not stealing away an existing store to move it down the road, just to leave an empty building).
So friends don't be taken in by half, or in this case less than half of the truth. EVEN IF there will be sales tax revenue to provide for more 2 more police officers, will that be sufficient to meet the increased need for police caused by the nature of the development being proposed. Perhaps an alternative plan would not invite increased criminal activity, or it would invite less criminal or anti social behaviors. This requires an informed comparison of plans. This requires information, not sloganisms.
Again, the FIRST and foremost Issue here is not what get Built it is BY who is it going to be built. Will the City USE Eminent Domain to Force some one OFF of their Land, and sell it to a Developer?
Second, will the Planned Development and new stores, shops and offices be good for Grand Terrace, in the NET assessment, not the Gross. IF for example there is more crime brought to Grand Terrace by the development, than the revenue it brings will compensate for, the NET would be a Negative.
If the Gross is a Billion Bucks, but the cost to the city is Two Billion, it is not a good deal for the city, and it is wrong to report only the Income, and not the Costs to the City, when making a presentation of the information.
To use the Power of the City and Redevelopment Agency this way is WRONG. Jacobsen Family Holdings should be shown to the end of town, along with the City Staff who have put this "Deal" on the Agenda in the First Place.
