By: Libi Uremovic | Original Article at patch.com
Developer Tells Commissioners of Plans of Zoning Change to Develop Logistics Warehouse
The Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission once again continued the proposed Annexation of land into the City of Beaumont pending the City’s ability to prove they can provide services to land. This was a continuation from the May meeting: http://patch.com/california/banning-beaumont/lafco-staff-recommend-continuing-annexation-hidden-canyon-warehouse-project
Commissioner Montanez asked if there was a representative of the City present – there was not. Montanez stated that he was troubled by the statement in the City’s letter: “Fire, library, solid waste, parks and recreation, utilities, and school services will continue to be provided by current providers. Because of the proximity of City facilities to the proposed annexation areas, future residents/businesses of the projects will likely receive faster response times..”
Commissioners Kevin Jefferies and Phil Williams were the only two of the seven Commissioners that openly expressed support for the annexation.
Said Jefferies: “You can’t turn Beaumont around by starving it.”
Commissioner Hanson questioned the Developer as to the plans for the land. The Developer stated that once annexed into the City the land would be rezoned from “Residential/Commercial” to “Retail/Small Industrial, which would allow for a Logistics Warehouse.
Commissioner Hanson stated: “LAFCO can’t take on the responsibilities of Beaumont.” Hanson was in favor of continuing the Item until the City of Beaumont could produce a Budget and Financial Plan that included paying the WRCOG Judgement and building the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the Annexation.
Commissioner Washington, who was on the WRCOG Board in 2007 stated that “logistics do not generate sales tax.” and reiterated Hanson’s stance that ““It was not the role of LAFCO to figure out Beaumont’s financial problems”.
Members of CVAN and BCRG were in attendance and spoke against the Annexation. Only the Developer was present to speak in support of the Annexation.
I presented the Commissioners will a list of ‘events’ that had unfolded since the May Meeting”
CITY OF BEAUMONT UPDATE SINCE MAY 28TH LAFCO MEETING
City Manager Alan Kapanicas placed on Administrative Leave May 29th.
Chief of Police Coe Resigned July 3rd.
Independent Internal Controls Audit:
City used Resale License to steal Sales Tax from other cities and claim it as their own.
City paid for wholesale supplies for private sector companies.
City has no Reserves.
City is Illegally Transporting School Children on Public Transportation
State Water Quality Control Board Order No. R802015-0025
City has no General Liability Insurance, only Workers’ Comp with $100 in Bank Account
Contracts and Construction Work not Compliant with State and Federal Laws
$48,000 Penalty from State Water Quality Control Board for over 330 days of noncompliant effluent levels between 2011 and 2014.
No City Engineer: Council hire HR Green on June 2nd, HR Green resigned on June 10th.
No Finance Department: Council hired a Finance Director from ‘Muni Temps’ that resigned. Salaries were not recorded on the May General Ledger. City can not produce the June General Ledger.
OTHER FINANCIAL CONCERNS OF THE CITY
$60 Million WRCOG Judgement
City Required to Build Three (3) Fire Stations
ALTERNATIVES DISCUSSED IN MAY MEETING
Yuciapa Recycled Water: Stalled
Bankruptcy: not a viable option for Beaumont
REFERENCES
Macias, Gini O’Connell (MGO) Part II: Review of Internal Controls over Cash Receipts: http://www.ci.beaumont.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/25841
The first Report from MGO is also listed on the City’s website: http://www.ci.beaumont.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/24408
Beaumont Self Insurance: https://www.csac-eia.org/members/public-entity/
Staff Resumes onto the website: http://publicdocs.beaumontcares.com/weblink8/0/doc/107494/Page1.aspx
Hidden Prepaid Credit Card: http://publicdocs.beaumontcares.com/weblink8/browse.aspx?dbid=0
Workers’ Comp Bank Account: http://publicdocs.beaumontcares.com/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=108527&dbid=0
And the Gateway Group?
They marched in a thousand strong !!
Just kidding – not one of them showed up to protest the logistics warehouse proposed in their own town a mile from their homes…imagine that….