From the Email Inbox:

Dear Gramps In Regard to In the News:

Steve Wall again is the Press Secretary for Tom Schwab. It was not an article it was a press release. I hope no one believes that Wall was just sitting at his desk and a light bulb went on over his head and he thought he would write again, yet another story on lawsuits. Strange it comes out right when Tom Schwab gets back from vacation and finds out that the citizens have asked for the permits and site plans and NDSP permits for Miguel's and the EIR for the Senior Housing and are told there aren't any and the City doesn't have to have them.

Dear Gramps In Regard to In the News:

A version of Miguels was approved in the area being graded. But the land being graded extends beyond the Miguel's site. In addition, the land exchange and property ownership, and all the plan including the Town Center Plan B has not been done. "Shared Parking Plan" can only be used to qualify Miguels Permits IF there is actually a Linked and approved Town Center Plan Be, which has not been done or reviewed as of yet. So much like what happens in city hall a lack of following process and procedure has caused yet another snafu.



Gramps has to update In the News Reviews.

Gramps looked at the blog post for June 2005 and sure nuff there was a foot print drawing for a Miguels. However it was part of Jacobsen total placement. Did the land get transferred to the right owner? Has there been a traffic flow plan? Issues were raised about the compliance with the "Barton Road Specific Plan", and that would include the stucco or building design even if not mentioned specifically. The council and city has decided to put into code, and plan design specifications and requirements to include such things as what type of plants, color of paint, wood use for decor, lighting, and all matter of decisions encroaching on the individual's rights and business owners and builders are required to comply. If the law, code or plan is to be changed it should be done not on a case by case application for change. Get rid of the requirements, and perhaps let free enterprise and fair competition return to Grand Terrace.

Just try and build small low income apartments like the ones on Preston... Just try and build a 3oo sq foot home on your own property. Just try to have a chicken for fresh eggs. The county would allow it, but not the city. These are all decisions made to "Increase" property values and each may "Increase Property Value" while making it so that the Economics of Grand Terrace move away from Family Ownership to Corporate Ownership. What we see is like the change the farmers suffered through. Family Farms were made into Corporate Agri Business Farms. This displaced farmers, killed small town USA. We are moving to Corporate Retail/BigBOXi/Business Towns, Real Estate driven greed which will Increase the Value of our Property so that WE are priced right out of being able to own, and enjoy property rights at all.

If this was the result of fair and equal competition that would still be bad for some. However, when the City allows some to go around the requirements, and get Do Overs only if the City is take not Court... The end result will look more like the Great Depression, where the middle class and even lower levels of folk that thought they were well off and secure will suffer the most when the economics of this house of cards and fiction of values collapses.

Bankers, and folks who can buy your homes and business for dimes on the dollar will be rewarded for their patients. Our current homeless will have new neighbors, and we may have to learn again, Fair Deal, and being Productive, has a real meaning.