In response to Councilman Walt's RDA Letter (Grand Terrace City News)
Friday, April 23, 2010 3:32 PM
To: "Grand PaTerrace"
From Sylvia Robles:
1. Why the urgency to pass the RDA Amendment, when the current plan does not expire until 2012?
2. If the City knew it's ability to incur debt was to expire in 2012, why did we incur or obligate bond debt we had no authority to pledge?
3. Why do we continue to avoid a thorough discussion on funding commercial and retail projects? There is $ 7.4 mil for "Southwest Commercial Site Improvements", $7.5 for in-articulated, "Additional Commercial and Economic Programs," $300,000 for Town Center Land Assembly." $5 mil for "Additional Public Infrastructure Projects." Private developers can use assessment districts to pay for their own infrastructure improvements.
4. We should only use RDA to directly benefit our citizens. Giving RDA money to private developers is like giving a bank bail-out to Wall Street.
5. I reached the same conclusion, in order for the City of Grand Terrace to exist it needs some RDA. I recognized that 30 plus years ago. I was willing to tolerate RDA to limited areas it if if directly benefited our community. But the entire City designated as blight? No, never.
6. As a legislative body we you can negotiate with Sacramento to redirect RDA tax increment to the city coffers. This will be a long and thoughtful process.
But it cannot happen if we incur more debt on failed private development. The time has come for the state and local government to do some give and take. We cannot continue on this road of unsustaniable debt.
Friday, April 23, 2010 3:32 PM
To: "Grand PaTerrace"
From Sylvia Robles:
1. Why the urgency to pass the RDA Amendment, when the current plan does not expire until 2012?
2. If the City knew it's ability to incur debt was to expire in 2012, why did we incur or obligate bond debt we had no authority to pledge?
3. Why do we continue to avoid a thorough discussion on funding commercial and retail projects? There is $ 7.4 mil for "Southwest Commercial Site Improvements", $7.5 for in-articulated, "Additional Commercial and Economic Programs," $300,000 for Town Center Land Assembly." $5 mil for "Additional Public Infrastructure Projects." Private developers can use assessment districts to pay for their own infrastructure improvements.
4. We should only use RDA to directly benefit our citizens. Giving RDA money to private developers is like giving a bank bail-out to Wall Street.
5. I reached the same conclusion, in order for the City of Grand Terrace to exist it needs some RDA. I recognized that 30 plus years ago. I was willing to tolerate RDA to limited areas it if if directly benefited our community. But the entire City designated as blight? No, never.
6. As a legislative body we you can negotiate with Sacramento to redirect RDA tax increment to the city coffers. This will be a long and thoughtful process.
But it cannot happen if we incur more debt on failed private development. The time has come for the state and local government to do some give and take. We cannot continue on this road of unsustaniable debt.
end
