Read the Article: There is a problem here...
Joyce Powers indicated in this article that the Redevelopment Agency is going to pay for the cost of roads, curbs, streets and other improvements needed to aid in the development of the Stater Brothers and or any of the Jacobsen's Development.
What are Development Fees for? Recall a land owner who wanted to make one large lot into 3 or 4 lots so their children could own their own homes on the family lot? The City Said fine but FIRST pay the road improvement Fees for the some time in the future when the city may get around to putting sidewalks and curbs in on that street.
So is Jack Brown and Douglas Jacobsen being given lower than cost fees so the Citizens have to pay for the cost of the Improvements that their development requires? How many years of INCREASED sales tax will be required to pay off that cost?
If anyone on the street was going to make improvements or build didn't they have to pay for their own road improvements sidewalks curbs and any traffic mitigation measures as part of their development or improvements?
Perhaps the Fees Collection and Assessments need to be audited to find out if some folks get waivers and others are charged according to the Code Requirements. Citizens are tired of paying for Favored Developers who have used the City as their Strong Arm Man to acquire property, and then add the traffic mitigation to the burden of the citizen or tax payers is just an added insult.
Did the Redevelopment Agency pay for the Dance Studio's Driveway or Darwin DDS's Driveway curb and sidewalk improvements? This is why NEW Development should be done with PRIVATE FUNDS and not mixed up with the Redevelopment Agency. Failure to foresee the cost of Development of the Infrastructure caused the OAC to Fail in Court.
When is the Planning Department, City Council, and City Attorney going to get a grip that the Costs of Development should be upon the Developer, and the City of Grand Terrace is not in the Development Business. RE Development should be for already existing buildings and infrastructure.
In addition IF Stater's Moves and there is not a Back Fill Occupant for the empty store, or if Stater's holds on to the lease to keep competition out of GT, the cost in sales taxes and blight could go right back to the Citizens and Tax Payers. If they release the property and it goes vacant the owners may charge the RDA for the lost income until a new occupant can be found. Why, well the RDA should not be assisting or competing with EXISTING businesses. The Super Staters will compete with all the Restaurants, Drug Stores, and other Shops in GT. These businesses may also be able to bill the RDA for lost income. So if the RDA pays any of the Development costs including Roads and Sidewalks or such they become liable for the cost of lost income of all the related businesses in GT.
Think about it City Council / RDA Board before you spend a dime that will later cost you a dollar.
