Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/1997I 2. KI In CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TOWN HALL MEETING Fifth in a Series SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AUDITORIUM 21865 COPLEY DRIVEr��prit DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA , f0'Connoor SATURDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1997 9:00 A.M. TO 12:00 P.M. (NOON) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL iz MAYOR HERRERA/DBRDA CHAIR Ntfff AVt�Y�i WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONMAYOR HERRERA/DBRDA Ca OVERVIEW OF REDEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN 5. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT AND THE REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN 6. ADJOURNMENT 10,20 c"� 5pe� R�o�vl 2.7-909 li,7i I o ur S m iJClr►, ZZ tv 3 0 ' F,a-gJIVIYAl'�� TERRY BELANGER, CITY MANAGER TERRY BELANGER, CITY MANAGER COUNCIL/BOARD, STAFF AND MEETING ATTENDEES �'co MAYOR�H�F,RRERA, DBRDA CHAIR t toil+oh k� __tl rive, Amy -e --:c CITY OF DIAMOND BAR .MND DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TOWN HALL MEETING Fourth in a Series CASTLE ROCK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM CALL TO ORDEPUROLL CALL Mayor Huff called the meeting to order at 9.22 a.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Ansari ROLL CALL. Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Mayor Pro Tem Herrera, Mayor Huff Council Member Werner was absent. Agency Members Ansari, Harmony, Herrera, Vice Chairman HUIT Chairman Werner was absent. Also present were. Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager/Agency Executive Director, James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Frank Usher, Deputy City Manager, Kellee Fritzal, Assistant to the City Manager and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION Mayor Huff 3 OVERVIEW OF REDEVELOPMENT Not given due to the fact that there was only one person in the audience. Council agreed to focus on his questions. 4 OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION PLAN Not given 5 QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT AND THE REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN Roger Meyer - re Redevelopment Plan Pg. 5 - acquiring real property - why is eminent domain still within the document9 Belanger - When Council adopted the redevelopment plan, it also adopted a policy resolution eliminating eminent domain This allowed us to set policy without starting all over again with the Ordinance Harmony - Understood that a simple majority of the Council could change the policy Belanger - City Attorney cues the Code Section relating to amending the Plan - Resolution indicates that the policy cannot be changed without amending the Redevelopment Plan Harmony - Other cities have changed policies and added eminent domain later Huff- Council has eminent domain already without having a Redevelopment Agency if eminent domain were added by the Redevelopment Plan amendment process, Belanger - The law allows an Agency to use eminent domain for the first 12 years of the Plan. After that, eminent domain cannot be used. This is not a power that the Agency needs Eminent domain tends to be used more with residential properties and there are only two residences within the project area. These residences are already considered non -conforming uses. Adding more residential to the Agency's Plan would be difficult to do because the Plan does not currently call for residential inclusion in the Plan. Herrera - Only 2 residences located in the plan area. Not looking to exercise eminent domain on businesses Mever - Will you have to create roadways outside the project area in order to handle the traffic flow created by bringing in new businesses? Belanger - The primary focus is on making what we have better --to fill in vacant spaces and enhance current businesses Also looking to attract new businesses. ,Hever - Had a traffic problem at Country Hills Towne Center because of the addition of the movie theatre Will we create that type of problem again? Belamzer - Agencv doesn't envision that we will be affecting residential streets by tilling the current shopping areas Ansari - Only 10% of the City is included in the project area. `leyer - Gateway Corporate Center - Thought it was supposed to be filled with ofi'ice buildings but that hasn't happened Belanger - Center was constructed at a time when the real estate economy was at its highest When it was completed, the real estate market had fallen apart Under the law, that center is now deemed to be blighted because there is no activity Harmony - Pointed out that Zelman chose to not sell their property within the Gateway Center until property values increased. They are currently lowering some of their prices. There is no blight there. Huff- The reference to 5300 million is misrepresented --those are not your property tax dollars and they are currently being spent outside of the City. Belanger - Read from the Code stating the definition of economic blight - 'economic conditions High business vacancies, In response to Mr Meyer, Belanger explained that if project area dollars are loaned to a business within the project area, they will be required to repay plus interest. The goal is to rehabilitate and retain businesses. We are going to utilize project area resources to do that. Meyer - People are afraid that this money will be given away to attract businesses Ansari left at 10: 12 a m. Belanger - No, the businesses will be making up write-downs through their property taxes. Not likely to see the Agency give away money without an expectation of return. Art O'Daly - Has studied and talked to redevelopment professionals--Harionv is putting out a lot of misinformation Belanger - All Agency decisions are made at public hearings by the Board of Directors including those relating to the expenditure of funds. Explained what the Brea Redevelopment Agency did that lead to the relocation of Avery Dennison to Brea. Explained the analysis made by staff concerning the costs paid by taxpayers for fire protection in Diamond Bar. The City ends up donating an extra S 1,000,000 per year for fire protection. City also subsidizes the County library in ways that other cities do not Herrera - Pointed out that N1r Harmony says we do not have a specific plan - true - will start getting into specifics after the first of the year He says the school districts will not benefit - not true - redevelopment agency could help make Pantera School a reality He mentions State debt of Sao billion due to redevelopment abuse - City can look at mistakes made by other cities and learn from them to avoid pitfalls Huff - Redevelopment funds from City of Industry directly resulted in the construction of Diamond Ranch High School O'Daly - Refected Harmony's ober to speak to the Chamber because of his continuing misinformation. Allowed City speakers because Chamber thought the information was valid Why can't the Citv contract to lower our fire protection costs" Belanger - Already a member of the Fire Protection District Meyers - Why is the Council also the Redevelopment Agency? Huff- As Council Members we are directly accountable to the people. With a separate redevelopment board, the citizens have less accountability because that board would not be elected. Also saves funds because the Council is not paid extra to be on the board but a separate board would be Belanu,er - � eiA te%�, cities ha,,e separate Redevelopment Agency Boards Meyers - Pointed out that with a by-pass road, there would be less traffic to support businesses Huff - Already have enough tragic to support our businesses. Primary concern is to keep tragic benefiting local residents Ron Clark - Does agency have power to overturn the General Plan? Huff - Redevelopment does not change land use Merely implements the General Plan Belanger - Redevelopment Plan must be in conformance with the General Plan - not the other way around Clark - Does monies coming in during the early years allow the Agency to do that much' Belanger - No, projections shown in Section E of the supplemental report indicate that maximum bonding is $40,000,000 It will take several vears before bonding companies will be willing to invest in the Agency Meyers - Are there any plans to hire any type of group of professionals to market the redevelopment area" HUff- The City contracts for services such as these 6 NEXT �IMEETING PLAN December 20, 1997 at AQNiD Adjournment 11 32 Diamond Bar Economic Revitalization Plan Allocations of Funds for Non -housing Projects The expected allocations of funds for certain non -housing projects were reduced from the allocation amounts shown in Exhibit C to the Redevelopment Plan. The reduced amounts were shown in the Supplemental Report to City Council. The amounts are reduced because the projection of total tax increment is reduced, relating to the deletions of land which were approved by the City Council. The reduced expected allocation amounts for the following non -housing projects are: Commercial / Industrial Rehabilitation Program $40,000,000 Business Expansion and Retention Program $70,000,000 Parking Improvements Program $ 8,500,000 Fbl ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA HOW MANY CITIES ARE THERE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY? THERE EIGHTY-NINE CITIES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY. HOW MANY LOS ANGELES COUNTY CITIES HAVE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES? SEVENTY-FIVE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CITIES HAVE RDAs. HOW ARE TAXPAYERS PROTECTED FROM REDEVELOPMENT ABUSES? FIRST AND FOREMOST. THE VOTERS OF THE COMMUNITY ELECT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY POLICY MAKERS AND DECISION MAKERS. CITY COUNCILNIEMBERS ALSO SERVE AS RDA BOARD MEMBERS. DIAMOND BAR VOTERS HAVE THE POWER TO CHOOSE THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT REPRESENT THEIR INTERESTS. AS TO FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE RDA, THE RDA IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL IT'S FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (LOANS, AGREEMENTS, BONDED DEBT). TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY HAVE NO FINANCIAL OBLIGATION, FOR THE DEBTS OF THE RDA. HOW ARE "BIG BOX " DEVELOPMENTS CONSTRAINED BY REDEVELOPMENT LAW? AB 1290 CONSTRAINS THE DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE ACREAGE RETAIL SHOPPING AREAS BY PROHIBITING THE USE OF SALES TAX AGREEMENTS TO UNDERWRITE THE COSTS ATTRIBUTED TO EITHER THE PURCHASE OF LAND OR OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD DIRECTLY BENEFIT A DEVELOPER. ALSO, RDA RESOURCES CANNOT BE UTILIZED ON PARCELS OF LAND WHICH ARE FIVE ACRES OR LARGER. RDA QUESTIONS PAGE TWO IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT REDEVELOPMENT IS A FINANCIAL TOOL AVAILABLE TO A COMMUNITY TO REVITALIZE, REJUVENATE AND REHABILITATE PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN A PROJECT AREA. HOWEVER, BEFORE ANY USE OF RDA RESOURCES CAN EVEN BE CONSIDERED, ANY AND ALL RETAIL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS WOULD HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL THROUGH THE CITY'S LAND USE PROCESSES. ALL GENERAL PLAN AND LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET AND ALL COMMISSIONS AND THE CITY COUNCIL MUST APPROVE ANY REHABILITATION OR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. GIVEN THE LAND ACREAGE REQUIREMENTS OF "BIG BOX" RETAIL SHOPPING CENTERS. THERE WILL NOT BE ANY SUCH SHOPPING AREAS LOCATED IN DIAMOND BAR. WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN IlviPLEMENTATION? THE REPORT TO COUNCIL, SECTION "C", SETS FORTH THE TIMEFRAME WITHIN WHICH IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ARE TO BE PREPARED AND APPROVED. THE ADOPTION OF THE ERA PLAN SIGNALS THE BEGINNING OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS, PROGRAMMATIC PLANS FOR COMIVLERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REHABILITATION, BUSINESS EXPANSION AND RETENTION, PARKING IMPROVEMENTS AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IWROVEMENTS WILL BE PREPARED AND, IMPLEMENTED. WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE PROPERTY TAX DOLLAR DOES THE CITY CURRENTLY RECEIVE? THE CITY RECEIVES 5.3% OF EACH DOLLAR OF PROPERTY TAX. E.G., FOR EACH $100 OF PROPERTY TAX THE CITY RECEIVES $5.30. RDA QUESTIONS PAGE THREE WITH REDEVELOPMENT, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE PROPERTY TAX DOLLAR DOES THE CITY RECEIVE? AS REGARDS THE PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT A PART OF THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION PLAN AREA, THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAX RECEIVED WILL CONTINUE TO BE SAME,I.E., - 5.3% OF EACH PROPERTY TAX DOLLAR. THE PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT A PART OF THE ERA PLAN REPRESENTS 89.5% OF THE TOTAL PROPERTY VALUATION IN THE CITY. - THE PROPERTY VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE ERA PLAN REPRESENTS 10.5% OF THE CITY'S TOTAL PROPERTY VALUATION. THE ERA PLANS BASE YEAR IS F 1996-97. THE BASE YEAR SETS THE PROPERTY VALUATION AMOUNT FOR THE ERA PLAN. PROPERTY TAX ALLOCATIONS TO ALL AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES WILL BE COMPUTED UPON THIS AMOUNT. AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THIS BASE YEAR AMOUNT THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE ERA. REDEVELOPMENT REVENUES ARE DERIVED BY COLLECTING THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE IN BASE YEAR PROPERTY VALUATION AND ALLOCATING THESE INCREMENTAL TAX AMOUNTS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: 20% TO HOUSING SET- ASIDE; 25% OF THE REMAINING 80% TO AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES; THE REMAINING 60% TO THE RDA FOR NON -HOUSING ACTIVITIES. REDEVELOPMENT REDEVELOPMENT IS A PROCESS THAT MAKES AVAILABLE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO ELIMINATE OR ALLEVIATE ECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL BLIGHT. THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES ARE DERIVED BY THE RECEIVING OF A GREATER PERCENTAGE OF THE INCREMENTAL INCREASES IN THE PROPERTY TAXES COLLECTED FROM PROPERTY OWNERS, WITHIN THE A PROJECT AREA. EXAMPLE: BASE YEAR: $17000.00 CITY'S SHARE: $ 52.90 THE BASE YEAR PROPERTY TAXES ARE DISTRIBUTED TO AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES (COUNTY, CITY, SCHOOL DISTRICTS, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, ETC), ON A HISTORICAL PERCENTAGE BASIS. YEAR ONE: t©�.0, mo $ . BASE YEAR: $13,000.00 ($52.90) INCREMENT: $ 20.00 ($1.06) HOUSING $ 4.00 (20% OF GROSS INCREMENT) PASS THRU $ 4.00 (25% OF INCREMENT NET OF HOUSING SET ASIDE)($.21) AGENCY $ . 12.00 PROJECTED INCREMENTAL REVENUES (45 YEARS) TOTAL PASS THRU AGENCY AGENCY/ HOUSING PLAN LIMIT ESTIMATED LIMIT $404,5323,000 $140,5509000 $1839076,000 $ 805,9065,000 BONDING CAPACITY (45 YEARS) $609000,000 $46,826,000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA NON -HOUSING PROJECTS/PROGRAMS $18330755960 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIA.L REHABILITATION $ 40005000 BUSINESS EXPANSION AND RETENTION $ 7050005,000 PARKING IMPROVEMENTS $ 855005000 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND FACILITIES $ 45,6851000 SUB -TOTAL NON -HOUSING $164,185,000 ADMIN.COSTS@10% $ 16,418,000 TOTAL NON -HOUSING $18016035500 UNALLOCATED $ 2,472,460 ASSEMBLY BILL I290 BECAME EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1994. AB 1290 PROVISIONS APPLY TO A PROJECT AREA PLAN ADOPTED AFTER JANUARY 1, 1994. AB 1290 SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED THE LEGAL STRUCTURE WITHIN WHICH AGENCIES OPERATE. - PASS THROUGH TO AFFECTED TAXIING AGENCIES IS STATUTORY. PASS THROUGH IS ACCOMPLISHED ON A FORMULA BASIS. - A PROJECT AREA HAS STATUTORY "SUNSET" DATES FOR INCURRING DEBT (20 YRS), PLAN IN EFFECT (30 YRS), TIME FOR DEBT PAYMENT (45YRS). PROHIBITS THE USE OF SALES TAX AGREEMENTS AND PROHIBITS DIRECT ASSISTANCE FOR AUTO MALLS (TRANSIENT DEALERSHIPS) AND RETAIL SALES CENTERS/MALLS, ON A PARCEL OF LAND WHICH IS 5 ACRES OR MORE. DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA TYPICAL TAX RATE ALLOCATIONS BY AFFECTED TAXIING AGENCY 10467 001.05 LOS ANGELES COUNTY GENERAL .249871640 001.20 L.A. COUNTY ACCUM CAP OUTLAY .000112634 003.01 L.A- COUNTY LIBRARY .022981910 007.30 CONSOL. FIRE PRO. DIST. OF L.A. CO. .164767204 007.31 L A C FIRE-FFW .006174559 023.06 CO LIGHTING MAINT DIST NO 10006 .008827716 030.10 L.A.CO FL. COM.DRIlviP.DIST.MA.IN. .001700091 030.70 LA CO FLOOD CONTROL MAINT .009620904 061.80 GREATER L A CO VECTOR CONTROL .000366464 066.80 CO SANIT DIST NO 21 OPERATING .012533138 146.01 CITY -DIAMOND BAR TD 91 .052937384 365.05 THREE VALLEY RWD ORIG AREA .004210712 370.05 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT .000748901 370.07 WALNUT VALL WT DIST RAP DIST93 .006821294 370.08 WALNUT VALL WT DIST IMP DIST#4 .001657128 400.00 EDUCATIONAL REV AUGMENT. FD .085064506 400.01 EDUCATIONAL AUG FD IMPOUND .133937622 400.15 COUNTY SCHOOL SERVICES .001395884 400.21 CHILDRENS INSTIL TUITION FUND .002770019 809.04 MT. SAN ANTONIO COMM. COLL. .029897713 809.20 MT. SAN ANTONIO CHIL. CTR. FD .000288964 980.03 WALNUT VALLEY UNIF.SCH.DIST. .194724692 980.06 CO. SCH. SERV. FD -WALNUT VALLEY .007739118 980.07 DEV. CTR WDCPD. MINOR-WAL.VY .000849803 TOTAL RATIO: 1.000000000 DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA HOW DOES THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA AFFECT FIRE SERVICES FUNDING? DIAMOND BAR IS A PART OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT. FIRE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT. THERE ARE THREE (3) FIRE STATIONS LOCATED IN DIAMOND BAR (NOS. 119,120,121). THE CITY IS PROTECTED BY THREE (3) ENGINE COMPANIES- AND A PARAMEDIC SQUAD. THERE ARE TWELVE (12) FIREFIGHTERS ON DUTY EACH DAY. THE ANNUAL COST FOR FIRE PROTECTION IN DIAMOND BAR IS ESTIMATED TO BE $5,960,892. ANNUAL REVENUES GENERATED FROM WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ARE AN ESTIMATED $7,030,586. THIS MEANS THAT DIAMOND BAR IS A DONOR CITY BY AN AMOUNT ESTIMATED TO BE $1,069,694. DIAMOND BAR HAS BEEN GENERATING MORE REVENUE THAN HAS BEEN EXPENDED FOR FIRE SERVICES, FOR MANY YEARS. REDEVELOPMENT DOES NOT AFFECT THE AFOREMENTIONED REVENUES. THESE REVENUES ARE BASE YEAR AMOUNTS. THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA PROPERTY VALUATION IS 10.53% OF THE TOTAL PROPERTY VALUATION FOR ALL DIAMOND BAR PROPERTY ($387,018,867 DIVIDED BY $3,676,126,836=10.53%). THIS MEANS THAT 89.47% OF THE PROPERTY VALUATION FROM WHICH PROPERTY TAX IS DERIVED IS NOT AFFECTED BY REDEVELOPMENT. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA FIRE PROTECTION REVENUE/COSTS EST. REVENUE $7,0305590 EST. COSTS $5,9605890 NET REV./(COST) $1,069,700 DIAMOND BAR IS A DONOR CITY, I.E., REVENUES DERIVED FROM DIAMOND BAR EXCEED ESTIMATED ANNUAL COSTS. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA ERA TAX INCREMENT (45 YEARS): $40495315595. ($3,827,167,410@10.57%) NON -ERA TAX INCREMENT (45 YRS.): $3,4225635,814. ($3,8271,1671,410@89.43%) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA CITY: BASE YEAR $ 87,5103195 ERA T.I. $ 432825969 NON -ERA T.I. $181,057,435 TOTAL $272,850,599 ($6.1063,347) FIRE: BASE YEAR $282,7811620 ERA. T.I. $ 24,025,747 NON -ERA T.I. $585,071A00_ TOTAL $891,8781767 ($19,819,528) LIBRARY: BASE YEAR $385017,980 ERA T.I. $ 3,230,091 NON -ERA T.I. $78,658,708 TOTAL $119,906,779 ($2,664,595) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA BASE YEAR FAIR MARKET VALUATION: $3,676,126,836.00 BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT VALUATION: $36,761,268.36 BASE YEAR TAX ALLOCATIONS: CITY FIRE LIBRARY (.0529) _ (.170941763)= (.022981910)= $1,944,671 $6,284,036 $ 844,844 FIVE-YEAR PROGRAMS AND EXPENDITURES PROGRAM 'PROJECi NONHOUSING PROGRAM • CommerciaUIndustrial Rehabilitation Program The Agency proposes to initiate the first phase of the CommerciaUIndustrial Rehabilitation Program. Initial activities will focus on the commercial and industrial properties along the primary commercial corridors of the Project Area, such as Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive, Grand Avenue, Lycoming Street, Lemon Street and Brea Canyon Road, and will include: evaluating existing structures from a structural and design aspect; conducting a "needs" assessment to identify infrasisucture, circulation, and parking deficiencies; and commissioning studies to identify both a general design theme and specific design concepts for each property. In addition, the Agency will formulate the program funding strategies and an implementation plan through which rehabilitation assistance will be provided, when sufficient funds are available. The second phase of this effort (the scope of which will be determined by funding availability) may include the provision of property rehabilitation loans and grants and property acquisition. This program to invest in Project Area businesses may also include improvements to business facilities, equipment and required new technology, as permitted by law. • Business Expansion, Attraction and Retention Program The Agency will also implement the Business Expansion, Attraction and Retention Program through the following activities: assessing current marketing strategies, brochures, and other materials; coordinating with the local Chamber of Commerce and/or trade organizations; pursuing actions identified in economic studies recently prepared for the City, including determining the needs of the community; identifying appropriate businesses to attract to the Project Area; and developing a successful marketing strategy to bring these businesses to the City of Diamond Bar. This program to invest in Project Area businesses may also include improvements to business facilities, equipment and required new technology, as permitted by law. • Parking Improvements Program The Agency wishes to move towards the establishment of a Parking Improvements Program. Project Area parking deficiencies will be identified in connection with the CommerciaUIndustriai Rehabilitation Program. If funds are available, the Agency will initiate parking improvements in identified areas. Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Diamond Bar Redevelopment Agency May, 1997 C-8 Report to the City Council • Public Facilities and Infrastructure Assistance Program The Agency proposes to initiate the first phase of the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Assistance Program. Initial activities will focus on capital improvements. For example, there are improvements proposed for the Diamond Bar Branch of the public library, located within the Project Area on Grand Avenue. Other activities will -include creating a priority list of the public facilities and infrastructure improvements identified in the Redevelopment Plan. If funds are available, the Agency may also initiate various public infrastructure improvements pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan. FIVE-YEAR PLAN ACTIVITIES The Agency will fund the cost of these programs in years 1 through 5. TIMELINE The Agency will establish both the Commercial/Industrial Rehabilitation Program, the Business Expansion and Retention Program, the Parking Improvements Program and the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Assistance Program in Year 1. The establishment of the programs will require the expenditure of funds. However, due to the fact that no tax increment revenues will be collected by the Agency until Year 2, the Agency will incur costs in Year 1 without tax increment revenues to offset these costs. Such costs will be paid by the Agency through the use of funds advanced to the Agency by the City of Diamond Bar. Therefore, revenues collected in Year 2 will be applied fust to the costs of establishing these programs and to reimburse the City. Funds for library improvements mentioned above will be provided in Year 1. The Agency will also prepare site plans, develop design concepts for structures, and determine the type and scale of needed businesses in the Project Area in Year 2. Site and architectural improvements, including, but not limited to, property rehabilitation and/or property acquisition and economic incentive programs will also commence. A marketing strategy for the attraction of businesses will also be provided in Years 1 and 2 and will be funded by advances from the City. In addition, funds for property owner rehabilitation assistance should be available in Years 3, 4, and 5. Available funds will be allocated to properties within the Project Area based on criteria determined by the Agency, such as financial need and/or level of needed rehabilitation. The development and implementation of a specific marketing program for targeted businesses should occur if funds are available in Year 3. Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc Diamond Bar Redevelopment Agency May, 1997 C-9 Report to the City Council SECTION E METHOD OF FINANCING AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT The following changes are required by the deletion of the identified properties: The changes required by the deletion of properties reflect a reduction in the base year secured value of $1,592,844 attributable to the identified properties, and the loss -of future tax increment that may have occurred with the redevelopment of the same properties. The following tables in the Report to the City Council have been revised; Table E-1 by Revised E- 1 Table E-2 by Revised E-2, Table E-3 by Revised E-3, and Table E-4 by Revised E-4. REVISED ASSESSMENT OF THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT A list of the currently identified proposed redevelopment projects is presented in Table A-1 of this Report. The total proposed project costs to be paid by the Agency are estimated to be approximately $180.6 million, including administrative costs. In order to adequately assess the economic feasibility of the Project, the total proposed program/project costs have been compared with the tax increment calculations shown on Revised Table E-1. The project feasibility analysis presented on Revised Table E-3 indicates that approximately $404.5 million of tax increment will be generated by the Project. Of this amount, approximately $81 million is required to be set aside for low and moderate income housing and $140 million must be allocated to the statutory pass-through payments to affected taxing agency pursuant to Section 33607.5 of the CRL. The remaining 183 million will be available to pay for Agency projects, which leaves $2 million of excess revenue. This revenue will provide a hedge against cost inflation which will likely occur during the time frame for implementing projects. As stated above, Revised Table E-1 indicates that the Housing Fund is projected to receive approximately $81 million over the life of the Plan. The Agency intends to use these funds citywide to improve and expand low and moderate income housing opportunities. ROSENOW SPEVAcEK GROUP, INC. DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MAY, 1997 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL u V N N N M N N N N N N N N N N_ V N_ . ` N N p p Np p N N N Noo + N= LG v a v e u+ti lu+ `� o a o u: INa w= o o a J O v+ «= c v .Gi p 3i Q = v a �• EJ 0 N N N N N N N - C p pp VV n �: tVi tRi N �C �C N Y V R •� J J V Y 0�G i U L p[ C O J N J w U J O U H Fni O C 'VO O J' J "a0 a a V <'. V i N a P 2� U Q U JO� L N Y n O V R G C U u C N a� ti e a M i Up D- Y •� a Y � r a tl�t 4G•- !7 U C J Y [Vi V U� e 4 p V K .4 L W O G y J One Y CRf a 0`c +moi U ��� a 6 µ i tVa �-� R^ R C Y Z V Y i ny - S i����€ C G C V- C C a a oc R OYG R R J J J J V V V p Q O CU'I n n FY Y w 4 Y Y V Y ap• � a a s 7 n n 3 S A A` J N w p- O- O n N V` V a` u O J ry` V N Y V+ -t". OC �V�ii V J V C G N J G 4: J Y O` �S Gt, C'f N u O U V O Y+ i P R O V A •� E W O N v O RJ R V C Y V J C a .0 P± V t o S V e- R D P U C a 177 - i- - OO J O O V Y N J J _Np {O� N OYL •pl O O Y J fni C aY-. - V N Q ` V` p J G Y R 4 qqO O V 4 R N R V O 4 V R D O O a A J w V C O V i 4 0 0 R O N p N p t N OU u 0 o C N u '= n J J U C �+ Y n C'f M V s C •� Q¢ Ga N i 'Y u o+ "V H i R it N n 4 + C e u G_ R N N N N N - - - - - - - - - - r - r� oOc Ct"'f V` V� V i S 1i O 'O i z a J W 4: O Cl 44 O R V lVa O N V to J� N V Y N = u u x u 'n 'u i � '- �. a ". :a i s o 'W - i., v a =• u- c, is a n ': ct '.� � Y- N� w N y Y w n a x o tom•+ u- ` m .- r u- a a w o o z 3 �i n o: u u !� G S L ti - - V^. - f: {: J •� O J IV N - n �i N J N O V R J O V N O I S G 3 V J} O S - C 'IS A v 'NY q CC �� N OC 'L a .• N V C` Cf 'n a N n a iJ a V O v Q t] a J •� J N V O O p V n is 4: A V J5s V N a a. N O O C W R N N D+ G i W w G V 3 J p :l a 4 N •. A C--- ei 'v_. 'G ac n a` i? y. V y � u i! Z- 3 4 J p is J w � C ti. O 2 t] i+ O �•i tJf io ^,. J tL ' C V N ^ W t'•i i� t3: Z Q V Y V V I - J. VJ. -=: 4 N N N---------- = N a y -{�ff 'u i u i., _ :• G+i• s S v^ •'�+` ] J tc - n yU•. N 4 C C 0 4 U V C'f O '^ N♦ n J {F J 'i N V 'J Y C i^ H is •A "C -� V 'J i } r A N=- A C V' N N N. N N J G O O V r Q^ IJ L J ppt1 a 0 -_ ii - A N J'• N la •` J (� y i n F la ^= 0 i 1� ' J a - G a a 0 ^ (¢ L O R O J a O 0- V IL•I K. n .. V i.�i Y S+ Y n J V D V 'i ^ n �L N w rN F t v y N s i 3E e v aw. ci m i v iti la •a t z a an. tF c `c. J: a J G N n,- v o L aX a c u n n- l: a e- a ti V C V t.- - a n- - n V C A V 'R V 'W V ' • S '`Jl 1 J _ _� V _^ � _- _ _ -n - J - � r: la G: iA -_+=. R Y-- C W i. U is P G Y t7 V M O G R •� V - W Y O� V J G Y: J S- R n iJA n i 7 C d O tAa u v u v� u S o i- - OO J O O V Y N J J _Np {O� N OYL •pl O O Y J fni C aY-. - V N Q ` V` p J G Y R 4 qqO O V 4 R N R V O 4 V R D O O a A J w V C O V i 4 0 0 R O N p N p t N OU u 0 o C N u '= n J J U C �+ Y n C'f M V s C •� Q¢ Ga N i 'Y u o+ "V H i R it N n 4 + C e u G_ R N N N N N - - - - - - - - - - r - r� oOc Ct"'f V` V� V i S 1i O 'O i z a J W 4: O Cl 44 O R V lVa O N V to J� N V Y N = u u x u 'n 'u i � '- �. a ". :a i s o 'W - i., v a =• u- c, is a n ': ct '.� � Y- N� w N y Y w n a x o tom•+ u- ` m .- r u- a a w o o z 3 �i n o: u u !� G S L ti - - V^. - f: {: J •� O J IV N - n �i N J N O V R J O V N O I S G 3 V J} O S - C 'IS A v 'NY q CC �� N OC 'L a .• N V C` Cf 'n a N n a iJ a V O v Q t] a J •� J N V O O p V n is 4: A V J5s V N a a. N O O C W R N N D+ G i W w G V 3 J p :l a 4 N •. A C--- ei 'v_. 'G ac n a` i? y. V y � u i! Z- 3 4 J p is J w � C ti. O 2 t] i+ O �•i tJf io ^,. J tL ' C V N ^ W t'•i i� t3: Z Q V Y V V I - J. VJ. -=: 4 N N N---------- = N a y -{�ff 'u i u i., _ :• G+i• s S v^ •'�+` ] J tc - n yU•. N 4 C C 0 4 U V C'f O '^ N♦ n J {F J 'i N V 'J Y C i^ H is •A "C -� V 'J i } r A N=- A C V' N N N. N N J G O O V r Q^ IJ L J ppt1 a 0 -_ ii - A N J'• N la •` J (� y i n F la ^= 0 i 1� ' J a - G a a 0 ^ (¢ L O R O J a O 0- V IL•I K. n .. V i.�i Y S+ Y n J V D V 'i ^ n �L N w rN F t v y N s i 3E e v aw. ci m i v iti la •a t z a an. tF c `c. J: a J G N n,- v o L aX a c u n n- l: a e- a ti V C V t.- - a n- - n V C A V 'R V 'W V ' • S '`Jl 1 J _ _� V _^ � _- _ _ -n - J - � r: la G: iA -_+=. R Y-- C W i. U is P G Y t7 V M O G R •� V - W Y O� V J G Y: J S- R n iJA n i 7 C d O �: { E -o m O - -- -- - -- _ ro - v? = ra -• n J N-- N tV - D V. _y -e = c _n C"os$x 7 � e � � u l' �- L -� y :� i -� O • E u u .. N c Y j x r v n ` N o x c , ca c• w �c - � u y N e 4 + V- O Y C'! w t - w i Y Y 0 U- U C X J V ... [� w V N R L .,; V L V � A nui a l`` :1 JV - N N N n roa a -c 'e '.a, a r 'e, - -- 'w •+ O o - O N n �- a '•+ u- =+ ei b o o e x m .+ Y n n w R t �a � ro-' O n O p w O- N L p Y 0 0 V V i i � rr V- n O w .. �` a y G �_ N J 1.4 e � u u N n N N N - - -- - - - - -- •' �� O �! A yy ���0'fff yO O V J p p J Vy � R CC+Ip. X� J J ti i c l P r ,X tC-. N u i �a9 P� O X 'O N b C J J t Y �J•-+ y R p v„ - V ` � - XO NCI' V�R iP RKO O Pv.IJP �OCNtO- O P P H C C� P• N Y Y O V C w N N N N-( N - - - - - - - -- P +R Y R R O� t i O� R V N V R�-� P O N V1 V u O V R •x< R O R V O V N N - ti r C R •� � �: { E -o m O - -- -- - -- _ ro - v? = ra -• n J N-- N tV - D V. _y -e = c -' _ s o u t a a x' + 1 i cls %� ' o a u e. - •- is - ry`- K to ro G C Z 7 � u l' �- L -� y :� i -� O • E u u .. N c Y j x r v n ` N o x c , ca c• w �c - � u y N e 4 + V- O Y C'! w t - w i Y Y 0 U- U C X J V ... [� w V N R L .,; V L V � A O O _• � •Yi C �.: V f.: �+ O R e- U V a U N - y y C V z+ e^^- U u E N N N n roa a -c 'e '.a, a r 'e, - -- 'w •+ � E �_ • 3 o - O N n �- a '•+ u- =+ ei b o o e x m .+ Y n n w R t �a � ro-' O n O p w O- N L p Y 0 0 V V i i � rr V- n O w .. �` a y G �_ N J 1.4 � O �! V N -� � Q� Q- •� .� P+ P •C i�� pV{ Z a O N O�- •� �O '� �n N PP P u J N L N L� �� OC j � R CC+Ip. X� J J ti i c l P r ,X tC-. N u i �a9 P� O X 'O N b C J J t Y �J•-+ - V ` � - XO NCI' V�R iP RKO O Pv.IJP �OCNtO- O P P H C C� P• N �: { Revised TABLE E-3 ' Diamond Bar Redevelopment Agency Diamond Bar Economic Revitilization Area BONDING CAPACITY (Not to be Used for Financing Purposes) INTEREST RATE @ 7.00% COVERAGE @ 1.25 BONDING CAPACITY OF REMAINING REVENUEIREDEVELOPMENT FUND PLAN 39,929,957.56 $10,185,687.60 58.099.373.34 $9.245,637.02 Total REMAINING YEAR 30 Yr. Bond Issue 30 Yr. Bond Issue 30 Yr. Bond Issue 25 Yr. Bond Issue Debt Service REVENUE Debt Service Debt Seance Debt Service Debt Service AFTER DEBT SERVICE I TOTAL BONDING CAPACITY 1 $46,825,794 0 2 0 186,334 3 0 418.441 4 I 0 732.290 5 80.220, (600.220) 200.055 6 800,220 (800,220) 412,323 7 800.2201 (800,220) 814,528 8 80.220 (800,220) 822,769 9 800.220 (500.220) 1.037,227 10 800,220 820,826 (1,621,046) 405,261 11 800,220 820.826 (1,621,046) 555.959 12 800.220 820,826 (1,621,046) 712,650 13 800,220 820,826 (1,621,046) 875,576 14 800,220 820,826 (1,621.046) 1.044.984 ' • 15 800,220 820,826 652,699 (2,273.745) 568,436 16 80.220 820.826 652,699 (2,273,745) 751,600 17 800.220 820,826 652,699 (2,273,745) 942.055 16 800,220 820,826 652.699 (2,273,745) 1,140,095 19 800.220 820.826 652.699 (2.273,745) 1,345.022 20 - �800,220v- - 820,628 852,699 - _• ' 793 373 - (3,087,118) _- : 768,780 21 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,373(3,067,118) 1,044,876 22 800,220 820,826 652.699 793.373 (3.067,118) 1,336,833 23 800.220 $20,826 652.699 793,373 (3,067,118) 1,643,344 24 800.220 820,826 652.699 793.373 (3.067.118) 1,965.138 25 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,373 (3,067,118) 2,302,976 26 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,373 (3,067,118) 2,657,663 27 800,220 820.826 652,699 793,373 (3.067,118) 3,030,040 28 800,220 820,826 652.699 793,373 (3,067,118) 3.420,991 29 800.220 820.826 652.599 793,373 (3.067,118) 3.831,445 30 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,373 (3,067,118) 4,262.378 31 800,220 820,826 652,699 793.3731 (3067,118) 4.639,932 32 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,373 (3,067,118) 5,036,327 33 800,220 820,826 652,699 793,3731 (3,067,118) 5,452,504 34 800.220 820.826 652.6991 793.373 (3,067,118) 5,889.452 35 820,826 652,699 793,3731 (2,266,899) 7,148,430 36• 820.826 652,6991 793,3731 (2.266,899) 7.630,088 37 820,826 652.699, 793,373 (2.266.899) 8.135.791 38 820,826 652.699' 793,373 (2,266.899) 8,666,742 39 820,828 652,6991 793,3731 (2,266,899) 9.224,202 40 820,826 652,699 793,373 (2,266,899) 9,809,496 41 652,699 793,373 (1,446,072) 11,244,844 42 652.699 793.373 (1,448.072) 11.890.053 43 652,699 793,373 (1,446,072) 12,567.485 44 652.699 793,373 (1,448,072) 13,278.749 45 652,699 793,373 (1,448.072) 14,025.538 24,006,587 25,445,616 20,233,680 20,627,695 (90,313,579) 173,668,700 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. DIASfOND BAR REDEVELopmENT AGENCY MAY, 1997 IS SUPPLEAIENTAL REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE TAX INCREMENT PROJECTIONS USED IN REVISED TABLES E-1, E-2 AND E-3 ARE SOLELY TO DEMONSTRATE TAX INCREMENT POTENTIAL AND SHOULD NOT BE USED TO SIZE BONDS OR PROJECT ACTUAL FUTURE INCREMENT. Revised Table E-4 below presents a summary of the project costs, tax increment revenues projected to be available, and a finance plan. The finance plan shows that there is estimated to be sufficient revenue to cover costs and, therefore, the project is economically feasible. Revised Table E-4 DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA PROJECT ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY TAX INCREMENT REVENUE AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT NON -HOUSING PROJECTS Total Tax Increment Revenue $404,531,593 i—_ Less Low/Moderate Housing Fund Set Aside $80,906,319 Less Mandatory Pass -Through Payments $140,549,314 Total Net Tax Increment to Fund Non -Housing Projects NON -HOUSING PROJECT/PROGRAM COSTS Public Improvements/Facilities Projects Commercial/Industrial Rehabilitation Program Business Expansion and Retention Program Parking Improvements Program Subtotal Administrative Costs @a 10% Total Non -Housing Project/Program Costs Net Tax Increment Revenue for Non -Housing Projects Less Total Non -Housing Project/Program Costs ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. MAY, 1997 16 $183,075,960 $45,685,000 $40,000,000 $70,000,000 $8,500,000 $164)185,000 $16,418,500 $180,603,500 $2,472,460 DIAMOND BAR R£DEVELOPMENrAGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Z Cos 0 h LO W/MODERATE INCOME COMPUTATION VERY LOW LOW MODERATE EXAMPLE: 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME 80% OF MEDIAN INCOME 120% OF MEDIAN INCOME MEDIAN INCOME (4 PERSON HOUSEHOLD): $511,300* VERY LOW $252650 LOW $415,050 MODERATE $61,550 * GROSS INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES OF ALL HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS F V 2 U _Y �^ 3 s O C Q ? N tz f Q L � V � Q M o v h O d F = [ ONi R q 4C c p Q = M h M M Z R QM M e c G p N M s z V � c u O h h a ^+ P N r• Q V O h N V 2 U 2 a �^ 3 0 w tz f Q L � V Q o v h O i C V � = [ ONi R q 3 p p Q = M h M u QM M e c G p N M s z V � V O h h a Q V O h N � b N F Y+ to N 2 a �^ 3 0 w tz f Q L J Q Y Q ° 2 a V M L. v V v h O e c = [ ONi R q V O p Q = M h M u QM M e c C N M s z V � V O h h p V Q V O h N j M F Y+ to N 0 H y = C � O = O W N � w = F W q M 2 a a �^ 3 b w tz f Q L J Q Y Q ° 2 V M L. v V v h O e c = [ ONi R q V O p Q = M h M � q Q M Ln M C N M v V O h h a a �^ 3 b b N V V L J Q V Q Y > .c e c h R q Q [ P P iy V Q M � C 0 v = C N M v V Q h h O O y Q oo j M 0 H y = a 2�- a �^ 3 0 V V L J Q V Q O V � > .c a � h R q Q [ P P '•1 q Q M V Q M M V Q Y O O y Q oo j M [ y = p O O = O W c u = F W q M C b N M b M ' a 2�- a �^ 3 0 h V Q O V � a � O O O Q [ P P '•1 q 10 T G \ Q M M V Q Y Q oo s u y = O = O W D Y h O O G y a h b N M 0 y V a r a 2�- a Q h V Q O V � G O ti O O O a• O C O C P h N M• Q M H h v a 3 Y a FISCAL YEAR CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SALES TAX REVENUES FY 1993 - FY 1997 SALES TAX $ / % DIFF. YR TO YR $ / % DIFF. FROM FY93 FY 1997 $2,331,341 (-$ 9,507/-.41%) (+$ 58,718/2.6%) FY 1996 $2,340,848 (+$166,869/7.6%) (+$ 68,225/3.0%) FY 1995 $21,173,979 (+$ 71,412/3.4%) (- $ 98,644/-4.5%0 FY 1994 $2,1029567 (- $170,056/-8.1%) (-$17031056/-8.1%) FY 1993 $212721,623 HOLDING FY1993 CONSTANT, OVERALL SALES TAX REVENUE DECREASED BY $1411,757 OR -6.24%. ($11,363,115=CONSTANT TOTAL AND $ 11,221,358 =VARIABLE TOTAL). CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCE RESERVES FY 1991-92 FY 1996-97 $ INCREASE % INCREASE FY 1995-96 FY 1996-97 $INCREASE % INCREASE $ 396765718.00 $11,463,150.00 $ 7,786,432.00 311.78% $ 958145970.00 $115463.150.00 $ 1,648,180.00 16.79% CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY JOINT TOWN HALL MEETING AUGUST 23,1997 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Pro Tem Herrera and Diamond Bar Redevelopment Agency Chairman Werner called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. in the SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEfie Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tem Herrera. CITY COUNCIL ROLL CAIQCauncil McTem Herreera�. Mayor Huff wasrexcused.yor Pro REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Herrera, .and ROLL CALL: Agency Members Ansari, Harmony, Chairman Werner. Vice Chairman Huff was excused. Also Present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager and Redevelopment Agency Executive Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk and Redevelopment Agency Secretary. CM/ED/Belanger stated that this meeting ub 't ethe first in a Series of 5 Tentatve City Council Town Hall meetings on the1ecofredevelopment dates have been set for future meetings 7 at thelaollowingon tlocations0 Diamond , October 25, November 22 and December 20, 19 , School Point Club House, Heritage Park Community Center, Souths a point Midi le makes and SCAQMD. He then explained that redevelopment available financial resources to eliminate or alleviateeconomic and physical blight. The financial resources are. derived by eceiving a axes collected from percentater ge of the incremental increases in property ject area. Using handouts, charts and graphs, property owners within a pro he explained the redevelopment process. C/AM/Harmony asked if Council and the Redevelopment Agency could have taken eminent domain out of the Redevelopment Plan. ed CM/ED/Belanger indicated that three affirmative A Redeevelopmlen be encyr could to amend the Plan or to amend a Resolution. commence without the provisions of eminent domain. The Plan could be amended by a 213 majority to add eminent domain back into the Plan. In response to C/AM/Ansari, CM/ED/Belanger explained that eminent domain is available only to a Redevelopment Agency may in a Project beea delete for eminent twelve years of the Plan. The current Plan m y be amended to AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 2 TOWN HALL MTG. domain. In response to C/AM/Harmony's question regarding how building a community center would alleviate blight, CM/ED/Belanger responded that findings can be found if evidence is available to substantiate the findings. Every piece of property located within a project area does not necessarily have to have an aspect of "blight." He read from and explained applicable redevelopment law. In response to C/AM/Harmony's question about whether cities could buy back their own bonds, CM/ED/Belanger responded that any city that buys its own bonds is assuming a risk just as any bond purchaser would assume risk. Over the life of the Project Area, the Agency's total ability to bond is limited to $60,000,000. Mrs. Grace MacBride, Willapa Ln., asked where the Redevelopment Agency gets the money to pay back the bonds. CM/ED/Belanger stated that revenues to Redevelopment Agencies are generated from all of the properties within the project area which generate additional tax increment above the tax base for fiscal year 1996/1997 and subsequent years as a result of the statutory 2% multiplier, and through new development and modification to existing property, such as renovation or rehabilitation. Jerry Hamilton, 1429 Copper Mountain Dr., stated that he is a confused homeowner caught in the middle because there are special interest groups that want redevelopment and special interest groups that do not want redevelopment. He said he moved to D.B. because he wanted to live in a rural area. The City's traffic problems are out of sight, so he is happy with what is presently occurring. He does not see that redevelopment is beneficial to the residents. He asked what D.B. will get with a Redevelopment Agency and expressed concern that, as a result of redevelopment, D.B. will have a hospital, a community center and new shopping center which will clog the City's streets. He believed the Council and Redevelopment Agency will have a hard sell to the average homeowner who need an explanation of what will happen. MPT/AM/Herrera responded to Mr. Hamilton that she did not believe D.B. has large enough parcels of land available to build shopping centers. She explained that she was more concerned with revitalizing the shopping centers that currently exist. One of her goals is to provide a Community Center for D.B. and she was not interested in doing anything that will increase traffic on City streets. Her goal is to eliminate traffic. AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 3 TOWN HALL MTG. C/AM/Ansari also explained to Mr. Hamilton that she was interested in redevelopment as a revitalization tool and in attracting new business to the vacant spaces in the City. Some of the businesses are decaying and difficult to reach. Redevelopment is a tool that can be used for these purposes with tax monies that would otherwise be lost to D. B. and used in other areas of the State. The City is not looking to build new shopping centers but to install signalization and improve traffic flow at the existing centers. C/AM/Harmony responded to Mr. Hamilton that he believed residents get very little out of redevelopment because it will cut other governmental services such as fire protection that are critical to D.B. C/Chair/Werner responded to Mr. Hamilton that his major focus was to see that the major redevelopment effort is directed toward public improvements. He indicated that he would like the agency to resolve a major portion of the existing traffic congestion in the City which he believed can be accomplished through intersection redesigns. He further believed that redevelopment can assist a developer or an investor in a commercial development. He pointed out that the Gateway Corporate Center traffic promotes major traffic congestion with its current occupancy. He indicated he would like to see a first time buyer assistance program to enable future generations to acquire property in the City. CM/ED/Belanger responded to Mr. Hamilton that the Redevelopment Plan indicates that it is not a specific plan. The current plan is a document which sets forth the timeline for planning --a significant portion of which is dedicated to making specific plans for the activities that are permitted and anticipated within the Project Area Plan. With regard to what will occur and how it will benefit the homeowner and community, these matters are handled through planning that begins in the next phase of redevelopment. The lowest amount of increment will occur in the first several years of the project. Page C-9 of Section C of the Report to Council calls out a timeline. The next step in the process is to put together the specific plan which will include an analysis of how redevelopment benefits the project area and the goals that are set forth, as well as the benefits to the community. Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., suggested that the information available in the Preliminary Report be placed in the current plan. He pointed out the disclaimer in Section 7 which states the City does not stand behind the Redevelopment Agency bonds and, as a result, he is concerned that the agency will not have a marketable bond. Further, he expressed concern that even if the Redevelopment Agency does not perform, it will still receive tax increment revenue and the other State taxing agencies will not be getting a share of the increased revenue. He said the plan should contain a statement AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 4 TOWN HALL MTG. that says the Redevelopment Agency materially contributes to the improvement or increase in the tax increment. C/AM/Harmony responded to Mr. Smith that if there is no debt, the County will not pay the tax increment to the Redevelopment Agency. The increment will be passed through to the other agencies. He said it is not clear to him that this agency will generate the type of increment that it claims. C/Chair/Werner agreed with Mr. Smith that the agency should give careful consideration to purchasing bonds. However, the City has adopted a plan and has set the process in motion to proceed. C/AM/Ansari said that if the Redevelopment Agency appears to be a bad risk, bonds will not be provided. Mike Goldenberg thanked ED/Belanger for providing a clear and concise presentation on the revitalization program. He asked why a familiar group of residents in the City can ask the citizens to provide a plan that will help to revitalize our economic community, place it on the ballot and then sue the City stating the Redevelopment Plan is illegal. The citizens pay the bill. The City's shrinking resources have to be spent on litigation or ballot measures, or both. Would our tax dollars be better spent by providing services to D.B., or should monies be spent on attorneys who do not reside in the City. How will the City get funding to maintain its parks and streets or develop a better library and build a community center. Why are citizens willing to let the County take our property tax dollars and send them to the San Fernando Valley and why do we hesitate in demanding that our property tax dollars be spent locally to provide services that the citizens need desperately. He said he wanted his property tax dollars spent locally and favored having local elected officials develop a plan and spending priorities for the City. C/AM/Harmony responded to Mr. Goldenberg that the D.B. Residents and Business Assn. is not a party to the lawsuit action. He indicated that traditionally, if a City passes illegal legislation and there is no objection within 90 days, it becomes law and no further objection can be lodged. Relative to the current lawsuit, the objections must be filed in court . to mark the time. C/Chair/Werner agreed with Mr. Goldenberg. He indicated that he supported City incorporation and felt that for similar reasons, he wanted the City's tax dollars spent locally. He noted that many of the same people that are suing the City or attempting to hold up the redevelopment process were also opposed to incorporation of the City. AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 6 TOWN HALL MTG. Jack Gutowski said that he did not appreciate attacks on a certain group of citizens. He believed that citizens who are concerned about excessive shopping center development have a right to be concerned. He was insulted that D.B. High School had become a political action committee in this instance and wanted to know what types of businesses the agency intends to attract to the City. He asked how the City can guarantee businesses will remain in the community after receiving a gift of funds. Further, he stated that he wants D.B. to remain a bedroom community. MPT/AM/Herrera responded that no one likes slurs against them and resented individuals circulating petitions who state that Council is looking to put money in their pockets because of redevelopment. She has lived in the community for 31 years, was elected by the public, has served the public for 18 years and resents these aspersions on her integrity. She stated that low cost loans would be grants --not gifts. She believed every citizen needs to be involved in improving D.B. C/AM/Ansari explained that she did not know if the City will lose businesses to other cities after granting redevelopment assistance. The City has to start somewhere. She said she had visited surrounding cities that have successfully used redevelopment to revitalize downtown and other blighted areas. She reiterated her concern to have a project area citizens committee. C/AM/Harmony told Mr. Gutowski that, in his opinion, it had not been proven that the free enterprise system would not correct any little problems that exist. There is no blight in D.B. C/Chair/Werner reported that the plan before the Agency, Council and community is a plan to establish a process. Over the next few years, the plan will be defined. Before any monies can be spent on improvements, public hearings will be held. Clyde Hennessee said he would like to see spending controls placed on the Redevelopment Agency. He reiterated that he wanted redevelopment for the City and he believed other citizens also want redevelopment but they are concerned about how the monies will be used. He expressed concern about future Council Members and wants protection built into the plan so that it cannot be changed. C/AM/Ansari agreed with Mr. Hennessee that D.B. does not have a downtown. Redevelopment could assist with revitalization of certain areas of the City. MPT/AM/Herrera believed that the K -Mart Shopping Center is a good beginning point for redevelopment and she envisioned outdoor eating establishments AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 6 TOWN HALL MTG. Jack Gutowski said that he did not appreciate attacks on a certain group of citizens. He believed that citizens who are concerned about excessive shopping center development have a right to be concerned. He was insulted that D.B. High School had become a political action committee in this instance and wanted to know what types of businesses the agency intends to attract to the City. He asked how the City can guarantee businesses will remain in the community after receiving a gift of funds. Further, he stated that he wants D.B. to remain a bedroom community. MPT/AM/Herrera responded that no one likes slurs against them and resented individuals circulating petitions who state that Council is looking to put money in their pockets because of redevelopment. She has lived in the community for 31 years, was elected by the public, has served the public for 18 years and resents these aspersions on her integrity. She stated that low cost loans would be grants --not gifts. She believed every citizen needs to be involved in improving D.B. C/AM/Ansari explained that she did not know if the City will lose businesses to other cities after granting redevelopment assistance. The City has to start somewhere. She said she had visited surrounding cities that have successfully used redevelopment to revitalize downtown and other blighted areas. She reiterated her concern to have a project area citizens committee. C/AM/Harmony told Mr. Gutowski that, in his opinion, it had not been proven that the free enterprise system would not correct any little problems that exist. There is no blight in D.B. C/Chair/Werner reported that the plan before the Agency, Council and community is a plan to establish a process. Over the next few years, the plan will be defined. Before any monies can be spent on improvements, public hearings will be held. Clyde Hennessee said he would like to see spending controls placed on the Redevelopment Agency. He reiterated that he wanted redevelopment for the City and he believed other citizens also want redevelopment but they are concerned about how the monies will be used. He expressed concern about future Council Members and wants protection built into the plan so that it cannot be changed. C/AM/Ansari agreed with Mr. Hennessee that D.B. does not have a downtown. Redevelopment could assist with revitalization of certain areas of the City. MPT/AM/Herrera believed that the K -Mart Shopping Center is a good beginning point for redevelopment and she envisioned outdoor eating establishments AUGUST 23, 1997 PAGE 7 TOWN HALL MTG. with trees and gazebos with an entertainment area where citizens can congregate and socialize. She expressed sadness that people were attempting to kill the plan before it is fully developed. C/AM/Harmony stated that businesses are filling up and the economic condition of the City is improving. The City's original statistics are off - target. There is no specific plan. CM/ED/Belanger explained to Mr. Hennessee that the rules that govern the agency's accounting of resources are the same rules that govern municipalities and other public agencies within the State. A redevelopment agency is a public agency and most cities' redevelopment agency members happen to be Council members. In most cities, those two entities meet at the same time and conduct meetings in a similar fashion. Regarding utilization of redevelopment resources for the development of a commercial property which will generate sales tax on a parcel of five acres or more of land not previously developed for urban uses, the agency is prohibited from using redevelopment funds for that purpose. The Environmental Revitalization Area document does not suggest big box shopping centers for D.B.; rather, it indicates that D.B. cannot compete with such entities and should instead look to itself as a "niche" market and attempt to ascertain its niche in the marketplace. C/AM/Ansari asked that citizens who did not have an opportunity to speak during this Town Hall Meeting direct their questions to staff. C/Chair/Werner thanked the Town Hall Meeting participants. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, Mayor Pro Tem Herrera and Redevelopment Agency Chairman Werner adjourned the meeting at 12:00 noon. ATTEST: LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk and Redevelopment Agency Secretary ATTEST: Mayor Pro Tem Redevelopment Agency Chairman I 2 3 0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TOWN HALL MEETING Fifth in a Series SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AUDITORIUM 21865 COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA SATURDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1997 9:00 A.M. TO 12:00 P.M. (NOON) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL MAYOR HERRERA/DBRDA CHAIR HUFF WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF REDEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN TERRY BELANGER, CITY MANAGER TERRY BELANGER, CITY MANAGER 5. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT AND COUNCIL/BOARD, STAFF THE REVITALIZATION AREA PLAN AND MEETING ATTENDEES 6. ADJOURNMENT MAYOR HERRERA, DBRDA CHAIR HUFF Allen Wilson Charles R. Lohan Janet Stockham 22809 Hilton Head Dr. 47 2086 Peaceful Hills Rd. 1007 Broken Creek Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91789 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Daniel Oaxaca Art O'Daly 23226 Montura Dr. 24075 Falcons View Dr. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Matt Tresaugue Martha Bruske Kevin House Daily Bulletin 600 Great Bend Drive 2536 Harmony Hill 2041 Fourth Street Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ontario, CA 91761 Marc Campos Mr. & Mrs. Jerry Hamilton Daily Bulletin Mike Goldenberg 1429 Copper Mountain Drive 2041 Fourth Street 1859 Morning Canyon Dr. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ontario, CA 91761 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Robert Arceo Wilbur G. Smith Mr. & Mrs. Bunta 1106 Cleghom Drive 21630 Fairwind Lane 20793 E. Rim Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Clyde Hennessee Wen Pin Chang Mary De Ortiz 22702 Sunset Crossing 1011 Summitridge Drive 221 Eagles Nest Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Catherine M. Jameson Stephen E. Nice Terry Birrell 415 S. Del Sol 2621 Rising Star Drive 1528 S. Gold Canyon Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91789 Ron Everett Al Rumpilla Mr. & Mrs. Don Schad 2618 Rocky Trail Road 23958 Golden Springs Drive 451 Covered Wagon Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Frank Dursa Debby O'Connor Mr. & Mrs. Dexter MacBride 2533 Harmony Hill 23725 Bower Cascade 435 Willapa Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Mr. & Mrs. Mike Elfelt Jack Gutowski Aziz Ansari 21119 Silver Cloud Drive 1856 Kiowa Crest Drive 1823 S. ClifJbranch Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Diamond Bar, CA 91765