Opinion: S. Tahoe Aspens project threatened by state
Publisher’s note: The following comments were read into the record at the July 12, 2011, South Lake Tahoe City Council meeting. They are reprinted with permission. The council could not comment because the issue was not on the agenda, but instead brought up under public comments.
Honorable members of the City Council, members of the city staff,
My Name is Greg Whittaker and I am the owner of the property where the affordable housing project known as the Aspens has been planned to be built.
The Aspens:
Has all financing in place.
Has all regulatory approvals in place and Construction could start in the middle of August.
It will create a lot of local jobs.
It will generate $160,000 in property tax revenue annually.
Gov. [Jerry] Brown’s decision to eliminate redevelopment agencies poses a legal issue that has threatened the project.
Without an execution of the loan agreement authorized in the Resolution and Commitment given by the City Council, the credits and bonds will have to be returned in 60 days and and the project will be effectively ended.
The most important issue is the distinction of the word “new” in the legislation.
Is the loan agreement a new contact, or a new obligation, or is it a documentation of the terms, conditions and restrictions already specified, written out and agreed upon in the Resolution and Commitment?
The language of the resolution itself creates a commitment and an obligation with specific terms and conditions. It authorizes and directs the city manager to act on it.
The resolution says, “The city manager or his/her designee(s) are hereby authorized and directed, to execute, in the name of the applicant, the Loan Agreement, the Regulatory Agreement, and such other documentation reasonably necessary to document the loan between the Agency and Pacific West (PacWest) Communities, Inc.”
While this is unfortunate, is it the time for the City to take on anymore burdens of indebtedness? The City is unable to provide and maintain basic services to its residents as it is and is laying off the employees who provide these services.
I believe the City is acting responsibly in delaying or denying upcoming new expenditures and re examining previous unstarted projects until the economy and situation with the State and Federal governments stabilizes.
If this is the project at Ski Run and Pioneer Trail, it should have been denied in the first place. Stop building on open land! If people wish to do these projects, then ask them to buy areas of old, run down buildings, such as just down the street, tear them down and rebuild, which revitalizes our community. If building continues on open land, Tahoe is going to look like downtown Sacramento! Save our open space!
The Aspen’s is a low income affordable housing project that uses funds from the State mandated Housing Element’s low and moderate income housing fund established for the purpose of building only low income housing units. This land has been restricted for over 10 years specifically for this purpose. This fund does not take any money from the cities general fund and creates no burden on the city. If it is not used and and the SLT RDA is dissolved it must be returned to the State. The city may not use it for anything else. The unemployment is hovering around 18% and most jobs in the city pay minimum wage. The city desperately needs quality affordable rental units for low income wage earners. The majority of existing rental unit are expensive, overcrowded, and are over 40 years old and poorly constructed.
Agree, quit building on open land and fix up the rundown, closed properties or tear them down and rebuild there. And if just some of the ‘greedy’ b–tards would just lower the pricing on rentals maybe more people could live and work in town.
And limit, restrict the number of people and cars in them.
Greg,
Wish for magical funds in one hand and wait for State funds in the other…. The State already took 2 million in RDA funds from the City. whether the funds are restricted, dedicated, set aside, guaranteed, or whatever, if the State wants them the State takes them! or just never provides the matching funds for the project. I wouldn’t expect any changes soon either.