Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1987 1019 RDA ADJMINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Moorpark, California October_19, 1987 The adjourned special meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Moorpark, California was held on October 19, 1987, in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. by Chairman Clint Harper. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Agency Member John Galloway. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Agency Members Eloise Brown, John Galloway, John Patrick Lane and Chairman Clint Harper. Steven Kueny, Executive Director; and Maureen W. Wall, Secretary. Absent: Agency Member Thomas Ferguson. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Ms. Ethel Sul kis, 270 Sierra, stated she was against redevelopment as it was being proposed. B. Mr. Don Fender, 14875 -C Campus Park Drive, stated the City needed to protect all historical buildings, and needed to watch historical trees and plants. He would like to see the City go to district elections before redevelopment begins in the City. AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, Agency Member Ferguson arrived. The time was 6:52 p.m. C. Mr. Bill LaPerch, 7200 Walnut Canyon Road, stated he was concerned with the process of redevelopment and wondered where the funding would come from. He also asked how money would be paid back to the City, and what would happen to those living in the areas that are to be rehabilitated. D. Ms. Cynthia Hubbard -Dow, 8873 -1/2 Roseland Avenue, stated she did not like the term "blighted" as it appeared in the redevelopment documents, and also inquired where people who were displaced by redevelopment would go. She also felt citizens would face higher taxes. Minutes of the Redevelopment Agency Moorpark, California 2 _ _ _ October 19, 1987 E. Ms. Irene Barrera, 176 Second, stated she owned several homes in the proposed area of redevelopment. She inquired what would happen to the displaced people and was concerned she would have higher taxes to pay. She also asked if the City were going to provide lower income housing for those who would be displaced. F. Mr. Tony Aguilar, 14320 Avenida Colonia, urged the City Council to remember what happened when Dodger Stadium was built. He felt Moorpark needed housing for lower income people, not more housing for the rich. G. Mr. Bernardo M. Perez, 4237 Canario Court, felt everyone should do their homework on this matter. He stated he would like to see the City issue a statement on what redevelopment is, and what laws are in effect which protect citizens. 5. DISCUSSION /ACTION ITEMS: A. Consideration of the Redevelopment Feasibility Study and Preparation of the Redevelopment Plan. Staff recommended the Agency proceed with preparation of the Redevelopment Plan. Agency Member Brown did not feel that the wording used in the report was good, in fact, she thought it was offensive. She also indicated she was aware of what occurred when Dodger Stadium was built. Agency Member Ferguson commented he remembered when downtown Moorpark was located from Moorpark Road to Moorpark Avenue, and the railroad tracks to Charles Street. He stated he had no intention of forcing people out of their homes, but only to purchase empty lots, or houses which were already on the market for sale. As it was currently being presented, he would not support the Redevelopment Plan. He thought such a plan might take care of the downtown area, but should leave the remaining areas alone. Residential areas would up -grade as time goes by. Agency Member Lane stated he did not want to see people displaced from their homes. He would like to see some guarantee in the document that people would not be removed unless they wanted to moved, and if they did decide to sell, they would receive a fair market value for their home. He thought the Agency could also help people who wanted to improve their homes. Chairman Harper commented he was sorry that the word "blighted" must be used, however, it was a very specific term defined in State law. The point of redevelopment, he felt, was to keep tax money from the City within the City. This money could be used for sidewalk construction in areas which have no sidewalks, and for street repairs. He would like to see the City appoint a committee composed of citizens, businessmen and others, to work closely on redevelopment. He also pointed out 20% of money coming into the Agency must go to lower income housing. Minutes of the Redevelopment Agency Moorpark,_ California -----3 _ _ October 19, 1987 Executive Director, Steven Kueny, gave an overview of the project and the process involved to date. He then introduced Mr. Marshall Linn and Mr. John Hoffman of Urban Futures, Inc. Mr. Linn stated it was not the intent of redevelopment to demolish people's homes. The State laws are very strict when it comes to buying people's homes and property. The goal of redevelopment is to bring money into the City to upgrade infrastructure, and to bring in new economic opportunities to the community. Once a plan is adopted, it would take nine months to change the laws contained in the plan. Responding to expressed citizen concerns, Mr. Linn and Mr. Hoffman informed citizens that redevelopment money could be used for street repairs, and that eminent domain powers could be left out of the Redevelopment Plan. Another citizen suggested the City should educate the citizens concerning redevelopment, and then place the question on a ballot in 1988. Agency Member Galloway felt a committee of residents should be formed to work on the plan, and that elected officials within the redevelopment area should also sit on the committee. He also suggested the issue be placed before the electorate and that the City should have district elections. Chairman Harper felt the committee of residents who live in the redevelopment area should look at the issue. AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING, the Agency recessed. The time being 8:55 p.m. At 9:16 p.m. the full Agency reconvened. MOTION: Agency Member Galloway moved and Agency Member Brown seconded a motion to not adopt the feasibility study or the project area at this time. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Agency Member Lane moved and Agency Member Brown seconded a motion to bring the matter back on October 26, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., and also to consider appointment for the citizens committee with the authority of a PAC committee be adopted; to direct that the City Attorney determine if a group can be appointed and given PAC powers without designating an area as the redevelopment area. The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote. The main motion, as amended, was approved by a unanimous voice vote. 6. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: No items were directed to be placed on future Agency agendas. Minutes of the Redevelopment Agency Moorpark, California 4 7. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Agency Member Brown moved a motion to adjourn the meeting to voice vote was unanimous. The time ATTEST: ze Secretary October 19. 1987 and Agency Member Galloway seconded 7:00 p.m. on October 26, 1987. The of adjournment was 9:35 p.m.