(Cypress, CA, 2/25/2017) [Editor’s Note: There are at least two causes for concern about Cypress’ City Manager’s proposal: 1) Is it a good use of taxpayer money, which George Pardon addresses first. 2) Under what conditions might it be a good use of taxpayer money? & 3) What should be the City’s goals for such a study, both of which I will address at the end of George’s article.]
1. Is this a good use of taxpayer money?
By George Pardon: At this Monday’s Cypress City Council Meeting (2/27/2017) Agenda Item 9 under New Business proposes spending $330,000 of the City’s money to develop a vision for the future development of the race track property.
When the school district sought a zone change to rezone MacKay School and the District Office, the city didn’t pay for it. Most recently, the city has asked two developers to propose plans for the city’s 13 acre site but the city isn’t paying for it.
While there might be some value in the city taking the lead on how the race track property should be developed in the future, the implication is that the city and the residents didn’t provide any input into the last process. Just like the city takes the lead on Environmental Impact Reports, the property owner reimburses the city. After all, who is the primary financial beneficiary of the rezoning of the property if not the property owner?
If the city has an extra $330,000 to spend, maybe they need to hear from the residents as to how they think it should be spent.
One statement in the agenda item may indicate the catalyst behind this push by the city to have this property rezoned: Continue reading
Editor’s note, 1/16/2017: In light of the sudden death of my co-editor and friend JM, I plan to go back and bring some of his greatest articles up to the front. His last full post, reproduced below, contains a lot of his practical wisdom & wit. Re-reading it reminded me of what a great citizen & thinker we’ve lost. I’ve put some of JM’s most profound sections in bold for those who like to save time:
(11/7/2016, Los Alamitos) by J M Ivler: (bolding added) It is NOT in LosAlNews’ purview to tell you HOW to vote. While the people who post here have a various number of opinions on who they will be voting for, and have even shared those opinions, it’s YOUR vote and it does count.
Yes, the top-of-the-ticket has been an ugly mess. More people are voting “against” one candidate or the other than “for” a candidate that they would actually like to have running the country. The campaigns have been ugly throughout the entire Primary process and into the General election. Even when you think the campaigns can’t get any further into the gutter, they found ways to do so.
The number of times I have heard “well I’m voting for this candidate because I will do anything to stop that candidate from winning.” is past triple digits. The number of times I have heard “lesser evil” is a multiple of that.
So, rather than wade into that mess my goal here is to get you focused on the fact that there are a great many reasons to go to the polls and vote, other than the mess at the top-of-the-ticket.
In fact, I will go so far as to say that you can skip almost all the partisan contests on your ballot because you really know nothing about any of the candidates running other than the winner will be from part of the duopoly. Really, one debate between the candidates for Senate to represent the entire State of California? No debates for the House or Assembly? Do you really know where any of them stand, what they stand for and what policies they will implement in your name?
But down the ballot there are some things worthy of you taking the time to fill it out. Continue reading
(11/8/2016) by Dave Emerson: [updated at 12:55 AM by JM Ivler]
NO on GG wins by over 2% [371 votes].
Los Alamitos City Council: Meet our new and old City Council members. Josh Wilson and Richard Murphy.
LAUSD. All incumbents won.
Seal Beach District 2: 1.8% difference. 36 votes. Tell me again how your vote doesn’t count… Moore over Winkler
Seal Beach District 4: Sustarsic over Phillips (not even close) 69.8 to 30.2
City of Cypress City Council: Johnson and Yarc stay (weren’t they “Yes on GG”?)
RCSD: No changes in leadership. Kalish came in close losing by 78 votes and 0.9% for position four out of three. Better luck next time.
10 pm: No new precincts reporting for Cypress or Los Al. . . results coming in more slowly. As of 9:30 GG had slightly expanded it’s lead after the first of 32 Cypress precincts had reported in. We are also adding the Los Al and Cypress School Board Races,as well as updating the Council races
This is also a place for local residents to discuss the results of these and other local races, in the comments section below. Please observe our policy of keeping comments and language relatively civil, dag nab it!
Click here if you want to check on our projections and how to interpret the initial results.
Click here if you want to go directly to the Registrar of Voter’s results pages.
9:30 pm results: GG’s lead growing:
(10/31/2016, by J M Ivler) On a street in Cypress a homeowner pays the government $8,000 a year in property taxes. Across the street a house of worship sits on 10 times the land and pays no property taxes. This boon is granted to the house of worship with some stipulations. The biggest is that the house of worship will tend to the souls of the congregants and stay out of the world of politics. It will not tell the people that this is a right way to vote, or a wrong way to vote. It will not suggest that “God” has any opinion in the mater of the world of politics. It will not move it’s congregants to vote for or against something, because the person leading the services is speaking with the moral authority of the Almighty.
It’s really a simple rule, and shouldn’t be hard for a Pastor, Priest, Minister, Rabbi, or any other cleric to follow.
So I was surprised and disappointed when I learned that at last Sunday’s services from Seacoast Grace Church’s Pastor decided to wade into the political waters by encouraging his congregants to vote “yes” on Measure GG. This follows a Pastor from Cottonwood Church doing the same in an article in the News-Enterprise just weeks before.
[Editor’s note: Since JM wrote this earlier today, we have received word that “Yes on GG yard signs were made available to congregants as they left the SeaCoast Grace Church on Sunday, which explains the sudden increase of signs in Cypress neighborhoods. Continue reading
(10/28/2016, by J M Ivler) Measure GG will get Cypress a FREE 20 acre park!
No, it won’t.
Measure GG is designed to do one thing and only one thing. Up-zone 170+ acres pf PS zone that has been frozen into place by Measure D so the owners can develop the land.
But, you heard that letter read in Cypress City Council where the good Doc promised that he would give 20 acres of land over to the City of Cypress for a park. You heard it with your own ears. In the letter he said that he would give the City of Cypress 20 acres of land for a park.
If I had read a letter that said that George Soros was going to give $50,000,000 to the City of Cypress, would that make it a fact? No. It would be just a letter stating the best possible intentions.
If the good Doc wanted to give the City of Cypress 20 acres for a park, Continue reading
(Cypress, CA, 10/18/2015) By George PardonA free park? Think twice before you swallow this hook.
Nowhere in the Measure GG initiative does it say that the race track is going to donate the 20.7 acre park area to the City of Cypress. While Measure GG restricts the zoning on the 20.7 acres, all of the race track property currently allows a park as a permitted use. Maybe the race track will donate the property to the city or maybe they will sell it to the city or?
The initiative does allow for a performing arts center to be built on this ‘park’ property with a conditional use permit. Again, the initiative doesn’t say the 20.7 acres ‘park’ property will be a donation to the city. It could be a small park with the rest sold off to a developer to build a performing arts center.
It’s time to vote. Why isn’t the initiative more specific on such an important issue to the residents? It’s interesting to see all the projects that the property owners chose to put in the initiative but then chose not indicate they were going to donate the 20.7 acre ‘park’ property to the city.
Also, a number of people have indicated they didn’t know that Measure GG rezones more than just the race track and golf course property. Here is a breakdown of the property proposed for rezoning: Continue reading