SOME EXAMPLES OF THE THREAT TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE "CITY OF GRAND TERRACE" ON CITY STATIONARY.
THE CITY WENT EVEN FARTHER ALONG THAT PATH BY PUTTING A HOLD ON PROPERTY WITH THE INTENT TO GET IT ASSESED FOR AN OFFER FOR THE PURPOSES OF USING EMINENT DOMAIN TO QUIRE THE PROPERTY AND PROVIDE IT TO JACOBESEN FOR THE TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT.
WHERE ON EARTH WAS COUNCIL MEMBER BUCHANAN WHEN THIS WAS HAPPENING?
From the Email Inbox:
What do you think?
To be in one of the top 100 cities to live in, did the city mention they were going to vote for eminent domain when the city was evaluated?
Wouldn't it be better to be a city that believed in the right to private property and that it should be a fundamental right.
The right to own property free from government interference is a fundamental right, because the Founders found it so important and put it in the Bill of Rights. The government should not be allowed to use eminent domain to increase its tax revenue by transferring private property from one private party to another.
The government should not be allowed to give a person two choices. "Take this money or we'll kick you out" or the government/developer unveils a map with a shopping center replacing your home.
This is the abuse and threat of eminent domain.
It does not matter if it is one person or a dozen people, it is still abuse.
If the city votes for it, then they are planning on using it.
Well, they the RDA Voted For it. By it... they voted to pass an RDA Code that will be submitted LATE to the State Agency that Required the Eminent Domain Code to be Sent to the State as written in the "Redevelopment Plan".
Businesses, Landlords and Homeowners who's land can be REZONED should avoid investing in Grand Terrace. That is what I think. I'd take my investment to a place that would secure my property rights, not perpetuate the use of Eminent Domain in any way, "even "IF" it hasn't been filed all the way to the courts".
Council Member Buchanan's Comments indicated a level of ignorance of recent history of the Threats of Eminent Domain and how close it came to be used right here in Grand Terrace. Perhaps he is unsuited to address the issue if he is so ill informed.
In addition it is clear the City's Demand to Negotiate is stated as being from the Redevelopment Agency, but the Stationary is from the City of Grand Terrace, so this Dual Communication increases the intimidation factor and is improper. It is time the Redevelopment Agency of the "City of Grand Terrace" be dissolved.
It is also clear that the RDA and the City does shift assets and funds from account to account for example the RDA House sold to the City and then Provided to the City Manager, when he was getting divorced and needed a house. Or the Purchase of land in the area of the Former OAC Area, (A case Mr. Johnson won). Purchased from a Friend of the City Manager/RDA Director, negotiated by the Mayors Campaign Manager and key contributor to her political funds.) You know what I think... Now it is time to see if the Citizens have had enough to take action needed to end the RDA and the Power's of the City Manager.
The Miguel's Case was decided in favor of Miguel's but this is not a statement by the court that it finds that "THE PLAN", or "A Plan" was followed. It was a statement that Miguel's complied with the requirements the City IMPOSED, at the time Miguel's Presented Plans and Applications. When the final decision is posted on the Courts Web Page, it will be posted. Miguel's may have "Won" but the City Did NOT.
"The City sold land to the CJUSD"... Land the RDA Purchased... and transfered from here to there on the books... Like the RDA Land being sold on the Market by the City because it can't or won't be used for Low and or Moderate Income Housing... after "Property Values have gone so high"... So what would happen if the City or the RDA sold a house below Market Value to a Low Income Person? How would that be different from providing a house to the City Manager, and paying him an income 4 times that of the average household?
