Who is Being Regulated as We Invite the ACLU to GT

American Civil Liberties Union : ACLU Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Review ...
... unprecedented law that restricts where sex offenders with victims under the age ... ACLU Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Review Iowa's Sex Offender Residency Restriction ...www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/20127prs20050929.html

Higher Law Needed to Protect Your Property in GT

IT IS CLEAR:
THE CITY MANAGER AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR TOM SCHWAB WILL NOT ALLOW EMINENT DOMAIN REFORM ON THE AGENDA OF EITHER THE RDA OR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.

IT IS CLEAR:
RETAINING THE RIGHT TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR THE PURPOSES OF "REDEVELOPMENT" MEANS TAKING PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SELLING IT TO OTHER PRIVET PARTIES FOR "DEVELOPMENT".

IT IS CLEAR: NO HOME IS SAFE AS ZONE CHANGES CAN HAPPEN IN A SNAP OF MR. SCHWABS FINGERS.

IT IS CLEAR: ALL BUSINESSES AND 1/3 OR MORE OF THE HOMES/RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN GRAND TERRACE ARE UNPROTECTED FROM THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO TAKE THEM FROM THEIR OWNERS.

THERE IS A NEED TO SAY NO MORE... STOP THIS PERHAPS A STATE WIDE INITIATIVE IS THE ONLY ANSWER. TO COLLECT SIGNATURES AND PUT THE PROTECTIONS ON YOUR PROPERTY PLEASE READ THE REST OF THIS POST.

http://www.yesonpropertyrights.com/action/petition

1251. (07-0018)
Eminent Domain. Acquisition of Owner-Occupied Residence. Constitutional Amendment.Summary Date: 7/5/07 Circulation Deadline: 12/03/07 Signatures Required: 694,354
Proponent: Christopher K. McKenzie, Susan Smartt and Kenneth Willis c/o Steve Lucas (415) 389-6800
Bars state and local governments from using eminent domain to acquire an owner-occupied residence, as defined, for conveyance to a private person or business entity. Creates exceptions for public work or improvement, public health and safety protection, and crime prevention. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The measure would likely not have a significant fiscal impact on state or local governments. (Initiative 07-0018.) (Full Text)
READ THE INITIATIVE
The California Property Owner & Farmland Protection Act is simple -- it provides property rights protections for all. Right now, government has the right to take private property - our homes, family farms, mom-and-pop small businesses - to build a sports stadium, big-box chain store, or a hotel. Politically connected special interests use and abuse government's power of eminent domain to take and develop private property. The is what the initiative does:
· Private property may not be taken by eminent domain for private use under any circumstances (i.e. to build a shopping center, auto mall or industrial park).
· Property may be taken by eminent domain only for public use (i.e. freeway construction, parks, schools).
· Property may not be taken by government and used for the same purposes (i.e. residential housing cannot be used for government housing).
· Family farms and open space are protected from seizures by government for the purpose of selling the natural resources.
· If a public agency takes property under false pretenses, or abandons its plans, the property must be offered for sale to the original owner at the original price and the property tax would be assessed at the value of the property when it was originally condemned.
· If farmers or business owners are evicted by eminent domain, they would be entitled to compensation for temporary business losses, relocation expenses, business reestablishment costs and other reasonable expenses.
· Government may not set the price at which property owners sell or lease their property.
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
(a) Our state Constitution, while granting government the power of eminent domain, also provides that the people have an inalienable right to own, possess, and protect private property. It further provides that no person may be deprived of property without due process of law, and that private property may not be taken or damaged by eminent domain except for public use and only after just compensation has been paid to the property owner.
(b) Notwithstanding these clear constitutional guarantees, the courts have not protected the people's rights from being violated by state and local governments through the exercise of their power of eminent domain.
(c) For example, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Kelo v. City of New London, held that the government may use eminent domain to take property from its owner for the purpose of transferring it to a private developer. In other cases, the courts have allowed the government to set the price an owner can charge to sell or rent his or her property, and have allowed the government to take property for the purpose of seizing the income or business assets of the property. (d) Farmland is especially vulnerable to these types of eminent domain abuses.

SECTION 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
(a) State and local governments may use eminent domain to take private property only for public uses, such as roads, parks, and public facilities.
(b) State and local governments may not use their power to take or damage property for the benefit of any private person or entity.
(c) State and local governments may not take private property by eminent domain to put it to the same use as that made by the private owner.
(d) When state or local governments use eminent domain to take or damage private property for public uses, the owner shall receive just compensation for what has been taken or damaged.
(e) Therefore, the people of the state of California hereby enact the "California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act."SECTION 3. AMENDMENT TO CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
Section 19 of Article I of the California Constitution is amended to read:
SEC. 19(a) Private property may be taken or damaged only for a stated public use and when just compensation, ascertained by a jury unless waived, has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner. The Legislature may provide for possession by the condemnor following commencement of eminent domain proceedings upon deposit in court and prompt release to the owner of money determined by the court to be the probable amount of just compensation. Private property may not be taken or damaged for private use.
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Taken" includes transferring the ownership, occupancy, or use of property from a private owner to a public agency or to any person or entity other than a public agency, or limiting the price a private owner may charge another person to purchase, occupy or use his or her real property.
(2) "Public use" means use and ownership by a public agency or a regulated public utility for the public use stated at the time of the taking, including public facilities, public transportation, and public utilities, except that nothing herein prohibits leasing limited space for private uses incidental to the stated public use; nor is the exercise of eminent domain prohibited to restore utilities or access to a public road for any private property which is cut off from utilities or access to a public road as a result of a taking for public use as otherwise defined herein.
(3) "Private use" means:
(i) transfer of ownership, occupancy or use of private property or associated property rights to any person or entity other than a public agency or a regulated public utility;
(ii) transfer of ownership, occupancy or use of private property or associated property rights to a public agency for the consumption of natural resources or for the same or a substantially similar use as that made by the private owner; or
(iii) regulation of the ownership, occupancy or use of privately owned real property or associated property rights in order to transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the property owner.
(4) "Public agency" means the state, special district, county, city, city and county, including a charter city or county, and any other local or regional governmental entity, municipal corporation, public agency-owned utility or utility district, or the electorate of any public agency.
(5) "Just compensation" means:
(i) for property or associated property rights taken, its fair market value;
(ii) for property or associated property rights damaged, the value fixed by a jury, or by the court if a jury is waived;
(iii) an award of reasonable costs and attorney fees from the public agency if the property owner obtains a judgment for more than the amount offered by a public agency as defined herein; and
(iv) any additional actual and necessary amounts to compensate the property owner for temporary business losses, relocation expenses, business reestablishment costs, other actual and reasonable expenses incurred and other expenses deemed compensable by the Legislature.
(6) "Prompt release" means that the property owner can have immediate possession of the money deposited by the condemnor without prejudicing his or her right to challenge the determination of fair market value or his or her right to challenge the taking as being for a private use.
(7) "Owner" includes a lessee whose property rights are taken or damaged.
(8) "Regulated public utility" means any public utility as described in Article XII, section 3 that is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission and is not owned or operated by a public agency. Regulated public utilities are private property owners for purposes of this article.
(c) In any action by a property owner challenging a taking or damaging of his or her property, the court shall consider all relevant evidence and exercise its independent judgment, not limited to the administrative record and without deference to the findings of the public agency. The property owner shall be entitled to an award of reasonable costs and attorney fees from the public agency if the court finds that the agency's actions are not in compliance with this section. In addition to other legal and equitable remedies that may be available, an owner whose property is taken or damaged for private use may bring an action for an injunction, a writ of mandate, or a declaration invalidating the action of the public agency.
(d) Nothing in this section prohibits a public agency or regulated public utility from entering into an agreement with a private property owner for the voluntary sale of property not subject to eminent domain, or a stipulation regarding the payment of just compensation.
(e) If property is acquired by a public agency through eminent domain, then before the agency may put the property to a use substantially different from the stated public use, or convey the property to another person or unaffiliated agency, the condemning agency must make a good faith effort to locate the private owner from whom the property was taken, and make a written offer to sell the property to him at the price which the agency paid for the property, increased only by the fair market value of any improvements, fixtures, or appurtenances added by the public agency, and reduced by the value attributable to any removal, destruction or waste of improvements, fixtures or appurtenances that had been acquired with the property. If property is repurchased by the former owner under this subdivision, it shall be taxed based on its pre-condemnation enrolled value, increased or decreased only as allowed herein, plus any inflationary adjustments authorized by subdivision (b) of Section 2 of Article XIIIA. The right to repurchase shall apply only to the owner from which the property was taken, and does not apply to heirs or successors of the owner or, if the owner was not a natural person, to an entity which ceases to legally exist.
(f) Nothing in this section prohibits a public agency from exercising its power of eminent domain to abate public nuisances or criminal activity;
(g) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or impair voluntary agreements between a property owner and a public agency to develop or rehabilitate affordable housing. (h) Nothing in this section prohibits the California Public Utilities Commission from regulating public utility rates.
(i) Nothing in this section shall restrict the powers of the Governor to take or damage private property in connection with his or her powers under a declared state of emergency.SECTION 4. IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENT
This section shall be self-executing. The Legislature may adopt laws to further the purposes of this section and aid in its implementation. No amendment to this section may be made except by a vote of the people pursuant to Article II or Article XVIII.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this Act shall become effective on the day following the election ("effective date"); except that any statute, charter provision, ordinance, or regulation by a public agency enacted prior to January 1, 2007, that limits the price a rental property owner may charge a tenant to occupy a residential rental unit ("unit") or mobile home space ("space") may remain in effect as to such unit or space after the effective date for so long as, but only so long as, at least one of the tenants of such unit or space as of the effective date ("qualified tenant") continues to live in such unit or space as his or her principal place of residence. At such time as a unit or space no longer is used by any qualified tenant as his or her principal place of residence because, as to such unit or space, he or she has: (a) voluntarily vacated; (b) assigned, sublet, sold or transferred his or her tenancy rights either voluntarily or by court order; (c) abandoned; (d) died; or he or she has (e) been evicted pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4) or (5) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure or Section 798.56 of the Civil Code as in effect on January 1, 2007; then, and in such event, the provisions of this Act shall be effective immediately as to such unit or space.

From the Email InBox: More on 8/14/07 Meeting

Hey Gramps,

Have you noticed that our City Council Meetings are a side show and entertainment rather than serious business that affects the lives of the families in Grand Terrace.

Case in point – when Lee Ann Garcia was talking, Bea Cortez turned to Schwab and was laughing and laughing.

Maryetta Ferre’s story of her life of being involved with the building of the high school in Grand Terrace was boring to say the least. If she doesn’t show more enthusiasm and stand up to AES, I will only see this as another showboat political move.

Why didn’t anyone take the measure to eliminate eminent domain seriously? Because they still want the option to use it in the future. I am sure this is the only thing keeping Jacobson in the loop. It was the original negotiating factor and it is the way he develops all his projects. I am seriously doubting their competency to understand the implications this will have on the generations to follow. Of course, they are only thinking of the money they will make now.

Gramps writes:
Yes,
The City Manager, and Members of the City Council are RUDE.
Their collective dismay and wonderment at why on earth the CJUSD is thinking about not building HS#3. Gee you are right AES is the only thing they did not bring up and it is the thing that they refuse to take an action on.... If in fact they are so ill informed they need to resign from the RDA and the City Council after they fire Tom Schwab and Steve Berry. The City Clerk can run the city more effectively and efficiently. OH Heck Jimmy Carter and a UN Oversight Team would do a better job.

Time To REMBEMBER AES REPORT

Remember:
The OLD POWER PLANT is going to stay and Steve Berry is Promoting it as a Movie Set..
The Tank Plant and NEW PROPOSED AES POWER PLANT IS IN YELLOW...
THE HS#3 location is inclusive of Property in front or adjacent to the Tank Field where the AES PROPOSED POWER PLANT IS to be Located. AS a matter of fact the "Students" will be at their highest activity and risk level as the area is where Physical Activity will be done, not where the students will be protected by air conditioned classrooms.
ALSO note the Proposed area and the location of the Rail Road Tracks, and Freeway.

The above is from AES's own representation. Their most recent representation does not show the school's proposed site to include PICO Park and the Athletic Field to the West of Pico Park. The City of Grand Terrace and the CJUSD have signed a MOU to share the Pico Park as part of the City's Concessions to the CJUSD... REMEMBER the Planned Football field... and athletic fields. Increasing the risk of the pollution exposure during heavy physical activity.

SNIFF SNIFF AES you are shifting the story... and the representation.....

From the Email INBOX:

The old generating portion of the existing plant will in most respects never be run again. Once they knock the fuel tanks down, it is gone there. Once they replace the N.Gas line it will by pass the old route and go just a bit further to north and connect into the AEC property. Should a train derail and the boxcars fly into their property should be protected by a berm and retainment walls. In one of the short talks on Aug. 1st, it was mentioned how that the power plant will produce fewer emittants of a certain element than iffn' the O.A.C.were to have been built. For there would have been more automotive, truck travels from that off ramp than the stationary power plant could produce. ,,,,silence.

When someone says, we are good because we are not as bad as..... there is a problem in their logic...

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF VISUAL IMPACT (Mayor Ferre will Plant Roses)

it is
NOISE POLLUTION
POLLUTION FROM Combustion of Natural Gas
Rail Derailment Risk
Particulate Pollution
Risk from Ammonia Tanks and Deliveries

From the Email Inbox: SHIFT HAPPENS ALRIGHT

Shift happens all right, and a lot of it happens at the city council meetings.

Colton School District - may be short on funds, they may be tired of dealing with the lumber company - but what they have said is they don't want a power company built near any of their schools. So it really isn't too surprising that they are looking at other options - especially when the city of Grand Terrace will not take a stand against the AES power plant (although they are bending backwards, frontwards, and sideways).

The two officers being recognized was very nice. It's hard to imagine how the city can say there's no crime in this town after hearing how many crime reports, arrests, and tickets those two officers have handled. Wonder how we got ranked 92nd best city in Money Magazine, must have been our low crime rate, right?

The city attorney was astonished that residents would think the hearing about eminent domain was about eminent domain - it's not the same thing he said. Okay if you say so? Mr. city attorney, you failed to explain how eminent domain and eminent domain are not the same - aren't you getting paid for this?

Mr. Buchanan rambled on and on and somewhere in his ramblings he said to his knowledge the city had never taken property by eminent domain - the city attorney agreed and he's been there since day one (too many days - perhaps?). Does it not matter to them that residents on Barton Road were sent letters threating eminent domain and letters to relocate? Maybe we should build a beautiful park in the city...hmmm, I think Honey Hills would be a nice spot for this park, but there are houses there... what to do about this? How about eminent domain? Will take the property for the betterment of the city.

Limited Private Property Rights in GT...

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?

ALVARADO ARRESTED FOR MURDER....

http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_R_region14.3f66b82.html

Man arrested in High Desert slayings

A Grand Terrace resident was arrested Saturday in connection with the deaths of two people in the High Desert earlier this year, officials said.

Jose Garcia Alvarado, 37, was tracked to Pomona and arrested on two felony homicide warrants, said San Bernardino County sheriff's spokeswoman Cindy Beavers.

He had been charged in the March 28 slaying of Juan Sotelo in Adelanto and the May 25 shooting of Francisco Sanchez-Lemus at a Victorville apartment complex.

Detectives found Alvarado in a car on Garey Avenue with a large quantity of drugs, according to a sheriff's news release. He was booked into West Valley Detention Center in Rancho Cucamonga on suspicion of two counts of murder and witness intimidation.

On the day of his arrest, Beavers said that Alvarado had told an ex-girlfriend who had cooperated with investigators that he was on his way to Huntington Beach to kill her and her family.

--Paul LaRocco
plarocco@PE.com
Regional briefs 08/14/2007

Grand Terrace: Codes and Ordinances

Sex Offender Regulation to Mirror the County Ordinance.

The ACLU has filed a law suit and will now target Grand Terrace to be included because the county restrictions applied to GT leaves no residential place available for Sex Offenders to be located... The city can not fully exclude Sex Offenders from living in the city... In order to not be included in the ACLU Law Suit the city should map where Sex Offenders can Live in GT and not be in violation of the newly adopted code.

Sex Offenders are bad, but this is an example of Go Along Politics that don't serve the interests of Grand Terrace. The "Go Along" has an impact to Grand Terrace that larger cities will not have. Where in Grand Terrace is far enough from a school, day care, or park? You had better get out your map and mark it up and send it to the ACLU before they file against the city.

Passed without comment..

Second reading... Tree Trimming:

Pass without public comment... why wait for 30 days?

Why bother with a 30 day wait?
Richard Rollings Crime Prevention Memorial:

Council Members Reports Key Points:

High School and Tom Schwab Met with the Super Internment...

If it can be done elsewhere they will do it if they can.....

Remember this is the same Tom Schwab that saw Signed Contracts on Jack Browns Desk... or said Jack Brown Said...

So trust him as far as you want...

The EIR the CJUSD filed, depended on the Power Plant not being a Generation Station but only a transfer station.

Relocating the Lumber Company is only a part of the delay..

City will help in any way??? Except to address the AES Power Plant as a Conflicting Use, and water run off problems.

We have done what the city could do... We sold the land the city did over half the site... we moved the 30" water line out of their way... We have bent over backward to make it work...

They will lose 10 to 15 million dollars if they walk away. But It rests with them to determine the location of the building and only Kent Taylor is supporting keeping the school in GT.

"The Biggest problem is Relocating Inland Lumber"... (Not the AES Power Plant)

But, let's not address the AES POWER PLANT ..... not being factored in...

Let's not talk about the risks of movie productions being promoted by Steve Berry...

RDA... Funds are not commingled... we have different accounts... in one bank account...

AES will contact with film studio. Liability would be covered by AES... ( So why is Steve trumping up business for AES, when that may bring added strain on our emergency services.)

Ferre Enters Her Comments on High School

Short history on bond. GT Voters Passed the bond... Specifically for a High School in Grand Terrace..... 23 ac of land at a bargain discount price. and moved the water pipe. Large sign is up.

"It is very disturbing that the school district is considering backing out of the high school entirely".

Press forward.... and fulfill the commitments...

Mayor calls upon the citizens to tell the school district to fulfill its commitment...

Needs of GT Families? 750 Students... Not 2500 Students...

Lee Ann Garcia:

Kids first... 25 million spent, and walking away is not an option the school board should take.

SanBag: Earthquake Preparedness Importance: An Event is Inevitable... Management of the Event is the Key to minimize the degree of the complications of a Disaster or Event.

Shift Happens

Cajon Pass a Lifeline for shipping and communications will be adversely affected in a major earth quake.\

Bea Cortez: SanBag Management Jumps Ship... and she can't report why or more information on that. No news on how that will affect the 215 and other transportation issues related to GT area.

School District is at odds with GT City Council and she has no idea why...

Dare we say AES and Cost Over Runs...

Tom Schwab turns 50.. Mature at last.... recieves cake hat...

Councilmember Miller's Report

We need to meet with the CJUSD and go with an agenda and set our terms and understanding of purpose any differences and get the problems nipped in the bud...

Thursday 5:30 School Board Meeting on Mt. Vernon at the Board Room... Facilities will be on the agenda..

Graffitti is not going away... It has been in the news. Union Pacific... City signes being tagged with graffitti..

Councilmember Buchanan... Redevelopment Agency... "Eminent Domain Has not been used..."

WRONG THE THREAT OF EMINENT DOMAIN WAS USED...

It has never been the case in Grand Terrace...

I don't understand... Our Redevelopment Agency Hasn't Abused its use...

He clearly needs to be schooled on the history of the Redevelopments Agency's Letters Threatening its use, even in homes Occupied by Residents.

REDLIGHTs Went Live Aug 13... Sept 14th Tickets are Real...

You get a ticket if you pass the cross walk Break the Line Before it has turned RED... IF you get a ticket you can review the video...

Right Truns with a REAL STOP... are OK...

NO CALIFORNIA STOPS for RIGHT TURNS

East and West Traffic is not being Monitored...

North and South Traffic is...

Lee Ann Garcia Got it Right and Voted NO!!!!

Mayor Pro Tem Lee Ann Garcia
lgarcia@cityofgrandterrace.org
909 430-2236

SHE GOT IT RIGHT A Vote No on the Eminent Domain Ordinance would aid in protecting your Property rights.

THE OTHER 4 voted to continue the Potential Practice and Threat of the use of Eminent Domain In Grand Terrace. Stating that "Owner Occupied" Property is exempt or protected from Eminent Domain.

Well Mayor Ferre, and Tony Petta and others who have their property in trusts, may want to know that a House Held in Trust is not technically a Home that is Owner Occupied. So they too may find themselves on the Eminent Domain Take List of the Redevelopment Manager's Whim.

WARNING TO ALL WHO INVEST IN GRAND TERRACE THE 1979 PLAN LISTS ALMOST ALL OF GRAND TERRACE AS BEING IN NEED OF REDEVELOPMENT. YOUR INVESTMENT IS SUBJECT TO EMINENT DOMAIN IN PERPETUITY. (FOREVER).

WILL THIS ATTRACT INVESTMENT and or QUALITY HOME BUYERS... NO...

WE also got a lesson on the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IS IN CHARGE AND HAS MORE POWER THAN THE CITY.

The Practices and Procedures of the RDA need to be modified and restricted in addition to the Restrictions on the City. Let's put it on the Agenda and get it done and stop sliding by the issue.

Note the Good thing is. The Ordinance is being signed after the deadline for filing it. So the GT RDA did not comply with the requirement and is filing the document LATE and it may be challenged based upon this reason if there is sufficient number of letters sent to the State Redevelopment Agency and the State Attorney General Jerry Brown.

IT is HOT out there PEOPLE

FROM NOAA Weather Special Warnings For Our Area:

TAKE PRECAUTIONS WHILE OUTDOORS TO AVOID HEAT EXHAUSTION OR HEATSTROKE.
DRINK PLENTY OF WATER...
WEAR LIGHT COLORED LOOSE FITTING CLOTHING...AND
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SHADED AREAS AND AIR CONDITIONED BUILDINGS

THOUGH HUMIDITIES WILL NOT BE EXTREMELY LOW...

THE HOT GUSTY WINDS CAUSED BY AFTERNOON HEATING WILL CAUSE ELEVATED FIRE DANGER INTHE FOOTHILLS...PARTICULARLY TODAY. HUMIDITY IS EXPECTED TO RISE TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY AS THE MONSOON GETS CLOSE.

THEN...APOSSIBILITY OF DRY LIGHTNING FROM HIGH BASED MONSOON THUNDERSTORMS COULD INCREASE FIRE DANGER IN THE MOUNTAINS TUESDAY THROUGH THURSDAY.

It is about Artificial Appearances

Dear Gramps:

Graffiti is a sign of an underlying problem. Drugs, Gangs, and Youth not having structure. Arrests for Graffiti have been in the mid to late 20's. Youth or Juvenile Arrests are unknown. Graffiti is a symptom not the systemic disease eating away at our community.

The Looks of the Power Plant is getting more attention from the City Council and City Management than the Cancer Causing Pollution, or Low Frequency Noise it will add to our pollution soup we call home.

Examine the conflict the City Council and City Management must feel. On one hand they want to shoot movies at the old power plant with all its "Interesting Features"... On the Other hand they say the "Old Ugly Plant" will be removed and the new plant will be hidden with trees and a berm. On one hand they said the Power Plant is Decommissioned and Never being started up again. This turns out to be half correct, they didn't say a "REPLACEMENT PLANT" Could not be built. Directly across from the High School Site or at least the Sports Facilities for that High School.

No Place in the City's General Plan or the EIR for the AES Power Plant investigates Alternative Power Generation Methods or conservation so that the "Demand" for more power is mitigated rather than the option of more power and more pollution into our environment.

No Place in the City would be allowed to have dead trees and look like Cage Park... Is AES exempt from Code Enforcement? Is the City of Grand Terrace exempt from its own code enforcement and weed abatement requirements?

It is great to want a High School, a Power Plant that is a Zero Emissions and Noise would be Great, and a Movie Set and a Park, all nice things. However, it may not be the best idea to put them all as neighbors. Particularly if the Power Plant is going to be your typical noise and pollution making power plant.

Regarding Goats: Later is Better than Never... How many of our citizens have wanted goats and a couple of chickens but the Code Prohibits these in "Residential Zoned Areas". How many of the folks that have goats in GT have been harassed by the City because the city has a distaste for "Agricultural" Use as it does not promote the "Highest Possible Value for Land USE"?

This city should encourage sustainable use of every property in GT. This includes the keeping of an occasional milk goat, some egg laying chickens, and or rabbits for the stew pot. People should be encouraged to plant not just trees, but fruit trees, and grow plants that produce food rather than just ornamental. These basic things make a connection to place and community in a healthy expression. Dare I suggest some of the Graffiti would be removed if there were other ways to connect to place and community. Of course the Drug Dealer Markers will need other action.

Responce to GT in the NEWS

Gramps: Regarding Graffiti on Bridge:

Of course he is embarrassed. He should be!

But what about the citizens of Grand Terrace who are harrassed by these gang members? I am shocked that he doesn't put as much energy into protecting the citizens as he does trying to make the City of Grand Terrace look like it doesn't have any problems.

GT wants graffiti on bridge gone
City doesn't want tagging to tarnish
image as one of the top places to live
Stephen Wall, Staff Writer
Article
Launched: 08/09/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT
GRAND TERRACE - It comes in all shapes, sizes and colors.
Some consider it an art. Others call it an eyesore.
Officials here just want it gone.

For a city that Money Magazine recently named one of the 100 best places to live in America, the thought of graffiti anywhere is almost too much to bear.

But it's especially bothersome when the graffiti is scrawled across a major railroad bridge that serves as a gateway to the city.

Of all the markings, the words, "We Bomb," in large white letters are clearly the most visible to passing motorists on the 215 Freeway.

"It's an embarrassment when you are coming into Grand Terrace and you have to see it," Assistant City Manager Steve Berry said. "It's like a graffiti billboard on the face of our city."

The graffiti in question has covered the Union Pacific railroad bridge over the 215 for about eight months, Berry said. The railroad owns the bridge and is solely responsible for removing the graffiti. The bridge, known as the Taylor Street overcrossing, is just south of the Barton Road exit. It is reserved for train traffic.

Berry has flooded Union Pacific with e-mails urging the company to take action. But nothing has been done and the problem is getting worse. "It keeps accumulating and accumulating and accumulating," he said in frustration.

Nestled between two mountain ridges, the town of roughly 13,000 residents has managed to escape the big city ills that have plagued many of its neighbors. Its low crime, high-performing schools, clean streets and affordable housing were reasons it made Money Magazine's Top 100 list announced last month. Residents and city officials marked the occasion by sharing a large carrot cake at a City Council meeting.

While graffiti might not be such a big deal in some cities with larger worries, Grand Terrace doesn't want anything to harm its lofty reputation as a great place to live.

"As a Realtor, I know graffiti negatively affects home values and it seriously detracts from the city's image as a safe, quiet bedroom community," said Jeff McConnell, a Walnut Avenue resident. Union Pacific spokeswoman Lupe Valdez said she is working to address the city's concerns. Valdez said removing the graffiti isn't as simple as it might seem. "It's a little more complicated than just going out there and cleaning it because it is over an interstate,"

Valdez said. The California Department of Transportation has rules and regulations for doing work over a freeway, she said. "What I told the city is first I need to find out what is involved before we can determine what can and can't be done," Valdez said. Caltrans spokeswoman Ivy Estrada said the process to get a permit to remove graffiti is simple, straightforward and free of charge.

"They would file an application telling us what they propose to do and what the impact to traffic would be," Estrada said. "We would be concerned about motorists' safety and their workers' safety above the freeway."

The review and approval process typically takes just a few days, Estrada said. "We would certainly be willing to have a meeting with the railroad to expedite things," Estrada said. Berry said the BNSF Railway has a bridge over the freeway just south of the Union Pacific bridge. BNSF regularly removes graffiti that appears on its bridge, he said. "There is no excuse for Union Pacific not to take care of this immediately," Berry said.

CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
August 14, 2007
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6:00 PM
22795 Barton Road

* Call to Order -
* Invocation - Pastor Rick Doucette, Calvary The Brook Church
* Pledge of Allegiance -
* Roll Call -
AGENDA ITEMS

CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 6 PM
1. Approval of 07-24-2007 Minutes

2. Public Hearing - An Ordinance of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace Containing a Description of the Agency’s Program to Acquire Real Property by Eminent Domain

ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING

1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Introduce Sheriff’s Department Deputies
B. Commendation - Laurie Shearer

3. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any Council Member, Staff Member, or Citizen may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

A. Approve Check Register Dated August 14, 2007
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda

THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990. IF YOU REQUIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK=S OFFICE AT (909) 824-6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IF YOU DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.

C. Approval of 07-24-2007 Minutes
4. PUBLIC COMMENT

This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on any items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of restrictions contained in California Law, the City Council may not discuss or act on any item not on the agenda, but may briefly respond to statements made or ask a question for clarification. The Mayor may also request a brief response from staff to questions raised during public comment or may request a matter be agendized for a future meeting.

5. REPORTS
A. Committee Reports
1. Emergency Operations Committee
a. Minutes of July 3, 2007
A. Council Reports

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, Adding Chapter 9.32 to the Municipal Code Relating to Regulation of Registered Sex Offenders

7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council Amending Chapter 12.28 of the Municipal Code and Establishing Maintenance and Pruning Requirements for Trees on Local Residential, Arterial and Major Streets in the City of Grand Terrace

8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Declare Richard Rollins Crime Prevention Committee Member Memorial
B. Adoption of Amended Integrated Waste Management Franchise Agreement as a Result of Transfer (Burrtec Waste Industries)

9. CLOSED SESSION - None
ADJOURN

THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2007 AT 6:00 P.M.

AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE NO LATER THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS PRECEDING THE MEETING.

In the News: IF You Can Bear to Read It..

GT wants graffiti on bridge gone San Bernardino Sun - Aug 09 12:02 AM
GRAND TERRACE - It comes in all shapes, sizes and colors. Some consider it an art. Others call it an eyesore. Officials here just want it gone. For a city that Money Magazine recently named one of the 100 best places to live in America, the thought of graffiti anywhere is almost too much to bear.



Steve Berry says GT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.... well then why the need for a Senior Center and other RDA Projects in such a Blighted Community?

Looking For Grandpa Terrace:

For those of you still looking for Grandpa Terrace.

Your looking for one of several people who post to this blog.

IF you want to Post an Opinion or Counter a Post's Points Email GrandTerraceNews@yahoo.com and put PLEASE POST IN THE SUBJECT...

Documents supporting your point can be attached.. jpg or bmp are the easiest to post.

Eminent Domain Ordinance Time Requirements:

NOTE THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING HAS 2 PUBLIC MEETINGS

EMINENT DOMAIN (CAN THEY TAKE YOUR HOUSE OR BUSINESS)

AND

SEX OFFENDERS REGULATION AND REGISTRATION BY THE CITY

BUT

THE CITY CAN'T PROVIDE THE PROPOSED ORDINANCES

OR "REGULATIONS" ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE

The next GT City Council Meeting has on the agenda a Public Meeting Regarding the Redevelopment Agency's authority to use Eminent Domain. (The Forced Taking of Private Property by the Redevelopment Agency.) The "Redevelopment Plan" has been negated several times by changes by City Council and Redevelopment Agency Action to the extent one could argue there is no Plan, and or no Plan is being followed as any time a "Preferred Developer" or Designated Developer or the RDA wants a change to "The Plan" the "Plan" is changed. The location of the Senior Housing and New Senior Center is an example of this. The approved construction of CVS and MIGUELS do not match the "Plan" for exterior features to the RDA Design Plan. The Plan also has the Removal of Grand Terrace Elementary School. The school's planned removal by the RDA and the City Planning Department was News to the School District and some of the City Council Members but the Planning maps still have that area as Commercial Property not Public School. Perhaps this is so the ABC Board will not exclude more Alcohol Licenses in "New Developments" near the school.

http://www.publiclawnews.com/public_law_news/2007/06/compliance-with.html

To review SB 53, click here.
To review SB 1809, click here.

CITY OF GRAND TERRACE

CRA ORDINANCE NO.____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CONTAINING A DESCRIPTION OF THE AGENCY’S PROGRAM TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN

WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. ____— dated September 27, 1979, the Redevelopment Plan (the “Plan”) for the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace (the “Project”) was adopted pursuant to procedures codified within the California Community Redevelopment Law (CCRL; Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.); and

WHEREAS, the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace (“Agency”) has been designated as the official redevelopment agency to carry out the functions and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and to implement the Redevelopment Plan; and

WHEREAS, Section 33342.7 of the Health and Safety Code, which was added by Senate Bill 53, which took effect on January 1, 2007, requires the legislative body which adopted a redevelopment plan containing eminent domain authority before January 1, 2007, adopt an ordinance containing a description of the Agency’s program to acquire real property by eminent domain.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Agency does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Agency is authorized to use the power of eminent domain to acquire real property within the Project, excluding all owner-occupied residentially zoned properties.

SECTION 2. Pursuant to the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 33367(d)(6), the Agency hereby finds that the adopted Redevelopment Plan requires the use of eminent domain.

SECTION 3. The Agency Secretary is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the California Redevelopment Association.

SECTION 4. If any part of this Ordinance is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance, and this Agency hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace at a regular meeting held on _____________, 2007.

Ordinance No.
Page 2
July 23, 2007

_________________________________________
Chairperson, Community Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Grand Terrace.

ATTEST:

Secretary, Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace

I, Brenda Mesa, Secretary to the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency held on ___________________, and thereafter at a regular meeting of said Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace, California, duly held on __________2007, when it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace.

AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace, California, on _________________________, 2007.


_______________________________
Secretary, Community Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Grand Terrace, California.

Remember

SUMMER CONCERT

Riverside Community Concert Band

AT
ROLLINS PARK
Friday, August 10th
starting at 7p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

Perhaps AES Could hold the concert at Cage Park

We can sing the new City Song:

"Under the Smoke Stacks" Melody of Under the Board Walk

Next Year

From In the News: You May Want to KNOW..

Your Health is being Sold By the State will the State Provide you Medical Treatment for Pollution Related Health Problems? Here are a couple of news articles for your thoughts. I want to add that Bio Diesel is cleaner but not a Zero Emissions Fuel.

************************************************************************

Agency relaxes rules for power plants - Stephen Wall, Staff Writer

Local air-quality officials have adopted new rules that could accelerate the construction of new power plants in the region. The board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District on Friday amended a rule to temporarily allow power plant developers to buy emission-reduction credits to offset pollution released by their facilities.

View Full Story

http://www.sbsun.com/ci_6560712?source=emailhttp://www.sbsun.com/

(Page at: http://www.pe.com/columns/cassiemacduff/stories/PE_News_Local_B_bcass07.410fced.html)

No construction team that work on Barton Rd without being reported or their picture taken with dust. The construction company that store their material on the lot to the east stir up dust everyday and it blows into the senior retirement apartments.

Curbing Pollution10:00
PM PDT on Monday, August 6, 2007
CASSIE MACDUFF

Four recent health studies have pointed to particulate pollution as the culprit in higher rates of heart disease and lung disease.This has made me, shall I say, sensitized to the amount of dust and diesel soot one is exposed to daily in the Inland Empire.

Everyone's supposed to help keep the dust and air pollution down.

That's why, for example, developers must control "fugitive dust" by watering when they grade for housing tracts, retail centers and other projects.That's why the South Coast Air Quality Management District has standards for dust control, even on public projects such as freeway construction.

You wouldn't expect to see any responsible government agency or private company openly flouting regulations meant to safeguard everyone's health.

So why was a San Bernardino city street sweeper brushing its way down E Street one morning in June without sprinkling water, stirring up a cloud of dust that enveloped it like Pigpen in the Peanuts comic strip?

Why was a Jack's Disposal garbage truck roaring down California Avenue in Redlands the morning of June 15 with its load uncovered, leaving a trail of dust and debris like Hansel and Gretel sprinkling bread crumbs in the forest?

Why was a Robertson's Ready Mix gravel truck rumbling down Interstate 10 between Redlands and San Bernardino the morning of July 20 spewing dirt and dust from an uncovered load?

Why was a Mac Tools truck idling its diesel engine for more than half an hour in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant in San Bernardino on June 15 with nobody apparently inside?

I made a few calls to find out; here's what I learned:

The street sweeper should not have been sweeping without watering, said Ken Fischer, San Bernardino's director of public services. "They're supposed to use water at all times."The gravel-mining company doesn't cover loads because it doesn't have to, said Mike Sercl, Robertson's transportation supervisor. "None of our loads are required by law to be covered so we don't cover any of them.

"Not quite, said CHP Sgt. Jim Fonseca. Loads don't have to be covered if trailers aren't filled higher than 6 inches below the top of the sideboards. But if dust and dirt are blowing out as they go down the road, it's a citable offense."No portion of the load should be leaving the vehicle," Fonseca said.

A Jack's Disposal official didn't get back to me Monday. But the law says all trash-truck loads are supposed to be "totally covered" during transit.

The best news was what I heard from Jacklyn Williams, the owner of the Mac Tools truck, who is converting her diesel engine to run on used vegetable oil from fast-food restaurants.

It will cut diesel consumption 75 percent, said Williams, a 23-year-old UCR grad with a degree in economics.The truck is a mobile store selling auto mechanics' tools, she said, and the engine has to be running to power the lights in the back, where the sales floor is. (The truck only looked empty when I saw it; she was on the sales floor with a customer.)

It would be great if more commercial drivers thought as Williams does.

Each could make a choice to lessen the air pollution harming Inland lungs and hearts.

Cassie MacDuff can be reached at 909-806-3068 or cmacduff@PE.com

AES: Information and Opinion from Herman Hilkey

Hello GPT.

A quick review of the AES POWER PLANT MEETING and my view:

My comments at the AES Meeting about not being personally invited to the Peaker Power Plant Hearings need to be understood. I am certain that AES had some hard feelings towards me because I was the ONLY Councilmember that opposed “swapping” land with them two years ago. When AES approached the City a year or two ago to swap lots I was strongly opposed to it. Their posturing that night was obvious to many that they were going to play hard ball to get their way with us. My position was a simple observation that you don’t feed a stray cat. That proved to be so true, hasn’t it?

AES convinced the other Council members, especially Ferre that:

1) The CEC wanted to hear from us and CEC would “come after us for comment” and that we would all be personally invited to meetings. At that time when I was on the Council and opposed to the plant, I was not personally invited and was not even notified of the first meetings. I found out about the first two meetings to be held IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY AT 2:00 PM (during most workdays) not from AES nor CEC but from a phone call from a friend in Highgrove because the notice was in the Highgrove Happenings Newspaper. Immediately I contacted Tom Schwab and expressed my concerns about meetings not being in this city and not even in this county. My statement about AES’s misstatements from the very first is my effort to bring to everyone’s attention that the things AES promised our City Council that first night HAS NOT, WILL NOT, AND WILL NEVER come to fruition. People who misstate little things (you will be personally invited, you do have say in the process), misstate about big things. The only reason that the meetings have been moved to Grand Terrace is because of my aggressive complaints to CEC.

2) AES claims that the old power plant may be started up again. This is bull. The plant has not been fully operational since I have been on the Council. There may have been some activity that AES is calling OPERATIONAL, but that plant has not been fully operational for years. The Grand Terrace City Council was told by Tom Schwab years ago that it was “de-commissioned” and will never be used again. AES needs the status as “operational” for a foot in the door to continue its application and to use as a threat to Grand Terrace. It hasn’t been fully operational for 10 to 15 years; it is just an AES way of trickery toward the City and CEC for their personal gain. I have included below CEC documents of that “Stand-by” status and was not “operational.”

On April 1, 1998, SCE sold its Highgrove Generating Station to Thermo Ecotek, which renamed it, Riverside Canal. At the owner's request, the plant was placed in a standby status and SCE personnel vacated the site in 1998. The plant did not operate during the summer of 1998. However, SCE staffed and operated the plant, at the owner's request and on behalf of the owner, for several months during the summer of 1999 under an Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement with Thermo Ecotek. Subsequently, the facility was again returned to standby status and SCE personnel again vacated the site.

Because the Riverside Canal plant is not currently operating and Thermo Ecotek does not intend to operate it this summer, SCE believes its proposal would provide additional power to the California electricity market and would not displace any generation currently bid into the CALPX market. Therefore, SCE asserts the lease would be consistent with the Commission's Preferred Policy Decision, Decision No. 95-12-063, as modified by Decision No. 96-01-009, and would not violate the buy/sell requirement of the Preferred Policy Decision. SCE recommends that any additional regulatory review caused by this lease should be minimal.

In its comments, Dynegy states that SCE's request does not go far enough to provide SCE incentives to be a full market participant like Dynegy or any other merchant generator. Dynegy recommends that SCE should not be required to track the costs and revenues associated with operating the plant in a memorandum account. SCE should be free to decide how the proceeds should be distributed, e.g. transition cost recovery or dividends to shareholders.

Similarly, SCE should bear the risks associated with potential losses. Dynegy claims its proposal has the dual benefits of reducing regulatory oversight and providing SCE market signals as the basis for its decision-making process.

Dynegy notes AL 1468-E is silent on the issue of bidding power into the PX Block- forward market. It requests the Commission clarify that SCE is permitted to sell power in the PX Block- forward market.

Dynegy acknowledges that SCE's proposal poses the difficult policy decision of whether the shift of all risks to SCE's ratepayers is offset by the benefit of the incremental availability of power. Dynegy believes that its recommendations would increase the liquidity of the market, benefit all participants, and are better than regulatory-based rules because they rely on market-based choices.

In response to Dynegy , SCE states that under the Preferred Policy Decision, it is obligated to sell all of its generation output to the CALPX and to track the costs and revenues associated with that production. Net revenues are then credited towards SCE's transition costs. If SCE is to operate the Riverside Canal generating facilities, a memorandum account is needed to track its costs and revenues.

With respect to recovery of losses, SCE responds that the approval of the memorandum account does not mean a guaranteed recovery of losses. SCE states it may seek to recover the losses and entries in the account would be reviewed for reasonableness in the Annual Transition Cost Proceeding (ATCP). There is no guarantee that the excess costs would be found reasonable in the ATCP. SCE, however, adds that it should not be at risk for excess costs because its proposal is a voluntary temporary action to provide capacity during the summer which would reduce the likelihood of Stage II and II Emergencies to the benefit of all California.

SCE does not object to Dynegy's request for clarification that SCE be allowed to sell the output of the Riverside Canal facility to CALPX Block-forward markets. SCE indicated that it is unlikely to sell Riverside Canal's power to the Block -forward market because it does not intend to operate the facility for a protracted period of time.

The reality of the Peaker Plant is that it is a group of smoke stacks. Why are they called Smoke stacks and why are they up in the air 80 feet? Who in their right mind would allow the building of three smoke stacks up wind from their home and across from the High School?

Oh yes, according AES, they will not be 80 feet because they will be down in the bottom of the existing tank farm which is 8 feet lower. AES tells us that we should be happy with this. But why does the government require 80-foot stacks if they are going to lower them below government levels?

It stinks. It the whole thing stinks and IF just three council members who don’t like the idea and were strong enough to speak out in public it would be a different atmosphere around town. But the reality of it is that Ferre has a strong political following in the Lions, Women’s Club and School District employees that the other Council Members are afraid of Ferre’s ability to control the next election.

What worries many people is that there will be liquid ammonia coming and going, there will be cleaning acids for the towers coming and going and trucks daily coming and going as they haul polluted sludge off to San Bernardino. This is all across the street and upwind from the high school and residence. But AES is “bragging” that they have reduced the truck trips by using less well water and more “potable” drinking water.

AES does have some good news. 1)By using well water, it will clean up a polluted well. The benefits to the City is not clear because no one, including the Riverside Highland Water Company, will ever use that well. 2)The pollution will not fall right next to the plant. The main pollution will fall next to the foothills. So people living on the west end of Pico are safe from the natural gas pollution, but if you live east of Mount Vernon (Observation, Westwood, Raven, Oriole, Paradise), or go to Terrace View, GT Elementary, or Terrace Hills you will get the brunt of the pollution. This is only the expected pollution from the natural gas. It is not the unexpected pollution from a chemical spill (i.e., ammonia, cleaning acids, polluted sludge haul off). All of this will be supposed done off of Main Street and never the shorter route through GT along Michigan, or so they say. 3)The last bit of good news…is that AES believes three 80-foot high smoke stacks will add to the beauty of GT. (AES pictures of these beauties are ALWAYS distorted more than the pictures on National Enquirer.)

Having said all of that my interest in the Peaker Power Plant is very simple.

If approved this power plant will give the remaining Colton School Board Members, who may be on the fence about a GT HS, the excuse to build HS #3 in Bloomington. The GT HS will forever be gone. Currently, we have only one School Board Member working for the best interest of the families and students of GT and that is Kent Taylor. Kent, by the way, is up for re-election next year (2008) and we need to keep him on the School Board. Our other representative in this Trusteeship Area of the Terrace is David Zamora. David lives in and works for the City of Colton He has never supported GT.

GT is an amazing place to live and we need to defend our town and not give in to people who want to lower the quality for their personal gain. Herman Hilkey