Saturday in Pomona

Today is the second Saturday of the month, and that means Artwalk time in Pomona's Arts Colony in downtown Pomona. The 2nd Saturday Artwalk starts at 6pm tonight. You can find a map and more information here.

* * * * *

If you're thinking of taking the 71 Freeway any time soon, you may want to find an alternate route. The Daily Bulletin tells us that the city of Pomona's Public Works Department has begun a $44 million construction project that will remake the intersection of the 71 and Mission Blvd.

The main portion of the project will be a bridge to carry traffic on Mission over the 71, eliminating the traffic light there. If you've ever tried to get through there during the morning or afternoon commute, you know that remove a major bottleneck. The construction area has been a mess for quite a while with Pomona having to construct bypass roads before the bridge work could begin.

The 71 and Ninth St. intersection is another bottleneck that has been reconfigured. You'll no longer be able to turn left from either direction on Ninth, and you can't get onto Ninth from the 71. The Bulletin article said it's unclear as to whether or not that's a permanent change. Residents off Ninth St. on either side of the 71 are no doubt unhappy about that part of the transit makeover.

It's equally uncertain what economic benefit, if any, the area will derive from the project. According to the article:

An economic study of the impact the improvements will have on the area has not been done recently, but will be done as part of the update of the city's general plan, said Raymond Fong, director of the city's redevelopment agency.

"We're still a year away from the the Mission-71 being completed and in an economy that is not indicating a boom" is close by, he said.

After the general plan is updated, the city can go forward with an economic strategy for the city. As part of that strategy, special attention will be given to the prominent city corridors including areas such as Mission and the 71 area, he said.

The area around the 71-Mission intersection has been overlooked for quite a while, though at one time certain politicians apparently thought it was a great backdrop for campaign photos.

Municipal Ordnance

As Daily Bulletin columnist David Allen pointed out last month, there was more than the usual amount of Claremont irony in the town's Architectural Commission Excellence in Design awards.

That empty commercial building at 601 E. Foothill Blvd., the one that was the proposed site for a 7-Eleven convenience store, was one of the seven award recipients. The award no doubt represents a consolation prize to the building owners, who haven't had one tenant since the building was completed (last year? 2008?). Sorta says, "No hard feelings. See, we're not so bad."

Claremont can be an awfully difficult place to do business, mostly because of the interference of our dear Claremonsters, most of whom have never successfully made or sold anything. They are for the most part dilettantes like our town historian, former mayor Judy Wright, or they're in the service sector like former mayor, former school board member, and former Chamber of Commerce chair Paul Held, who has a Claremont-centric family law practice. And that all goes a long way towards explaining Official Claremont's poor understanding of the concerns of people running reality-centric businesses.

All this got us to thinking that the Architectural Commission might want to think seriously about giving their award a snappier title. Here is our humble offering (given to the the commission free of charge - our civic duty, you know): The Claremont Neutron Bomb Award, after the Cold War tactical WMD of choice.

The neutron bomb's main selling point, you'll recall, was that it eliminated people but left most structures standing, similar to what the Claremont 400's tried to do to citizens and businesses alike over the years. So, the neutron bomb was immensely attractive to the realty crowd (another important Claremont interest group). After all, human assets can be replaced much more easily than infrastructure. Think redevelopment, except with people.

Given the current economic climate, there very well could be many more empty buildings around in the future, and that would drive down the town's image. But winning an award goes a long way toward softening bad publicity, a fact with which Claremont is well-acquainted.

We remember that in 2001, when City Hall was still suffering in the press (there were still such things back then) over the shooting death of African American teen Irvin Landrum after a traffic stop by Claremont PD, Claremont's then-Human Services Director Dick Guthrie applied for and received a Helen Putnam Award for Excellence from the League of California Cities for its response to crisis. Needless to say, the award came several years before the issue was resolved. The City's main response up to that point had been a mostly notional heads-in-the-sand one: "You can't see me if I can't see you."

Some things change, others are ever constant. Claremont's mayor at the time the award was announced? The aforementioned Paul Held, Esq., who, along with wife Kay, just last week was honored as the Grand Marshal of our annual 4th of July parade. Held, who as mayor seemed at war with certain Claremonters, could tell you that when things look bleakest, trot out an award.

Knock 'em dead, Claremont.

Another Blog in Town

A while back, Daily Bulletin columnist David Allen mentioned a relatively new Claremont blog. Unlike other blogs about our fair city, Allen wrote, Conscious Claremont avoids being hectoring in its tone, which is a good thing. The last thing Claremont (and the blogosphere) needs is another whiny blogger.

Here's the anonymous blogger self-description:

About Me

I moved to Claremont in the 3rd grade & went to elementary, junior,& high school here. I went away for college, into the ‘big city’, Los Angeles. I was, like most Claremont kids, eager to leave. But, after 4 yrs. there, I felt city life wasn't for me. I've resided here the past 6 yrs. I have not been active in civic life before & only started to follow city hall in depth since last Aug. I have a b.a. in business economics & accounting. Thank you for reading, & I appreciate your feedback.

The posts cover a variety of Claremont issues, usually with a cost-benefit analysis weaved in. The sampling we read included posts about redevelopment (with a comment on ex-city manager Glenn Southard), changes in Claremont's financial policies, our zany, conflicted city council, and the real cost of the new Padua Park. The new blog also covers other items of interest, such as local architecture and local art events.

The park post had a comment that seemed fairly representative of Conscious Claremont's analyses:

An observer can't help feeling strange at the vast & expensive construction occurring while we experience serious fiscal problems.

While in recent years we've terminated employees & funding, we were able to spend almost 4 million from the general fund to finance this site, including this year's costs of $1.7 million. Even with an $850,000 conservancy grant, projections of city spending are upwards of $4.7 million.

This brings up another point. Why haven't the local papers made the obvious connection between the huge cost of the park to the loss of employees and city programs?

Observations like the one above show why blogs like Conscious Claremont exist in the first place. They fill an informational niche that most newspapers, including the Daily Bulletin or the Claremont Courier can't or won't address because the stories are too complex to fit into 15 or 20 column-inches.

So it takes a Conscious Claremont to put things into their proper context. To take the example of Padua Park, that one project accounts for virtually all of the City's budget deficit over that past two fiscal years. Our town mothers and fathers have bemoaned the loss of staff and services, yet they are the very ones who insisted that the park be completed now, costs be damned. The project could easily have been deferred until the economy and the city finances improved, but people like former mayor Ellen Taylor, current mayor Linda Elderkin, and our mayor pro tem Sam Pedroza, remained inflexible in their refusal to see how their project would end up gutting the city's balance sheet.

Ironically, some of the staff members whose jobs were eliminated because of Claremont's financial problems were the ones most responsible for the park's construction. Those employees were victims of the karma wheel coming full circle, like soon-to-be executed prisoners ordered to dig their own graves.

There are any number of ways a real news story could have been constructed out of the Padua Park project, but the traditional local news sources took the cheap, easy way out and failed to connect the dots. They simply wrote pieces about the park's grand opening without one single mention of the project's destructive fiscal effects.

Readers do notice the lack of context in such stories, contrary to whatever marketing reports editors are studying. As newspaper readership continues its downward death-spiral, we can't help wonder if papers themselves aren't doing more than a little of their own grave digging by not taking the time and energy to report the real news.

Another Year Older and Deeper in Debt

Local governments around California let out a collective groan last week when Sacramento Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly issued a ruling that supported the state's right to take $2 billion in redevelopment funds from redevelopment agencies across the state over the next two fiscal years.

The state, as you know, needs the money to help balance its $18 billion budget deficit. It seems to us that we were in just about the same place this time last year. The plan is for the state to take $1.7 billion for 2009-10 and $350 million for 2010-11. The money, legislators say, is supposed to go to local schools, which have their own problem with the state withholding money.

The first $1.7 billion payment was due yesterday. Monday's Daily Bulletin had an article about the state's latest money shift. The article described the impact of the redevelopment money grab on Inland Empire cities. Claremont City Manager Jeff Parker told the Bulletin that at least one Claremont Redevelopment Agency job will be eliminated because of the money transfer:

The Claremont redevelopment agency takes in about $3.8 million in property taxes, but has to pass along $1.3 million to other local agencies or into its low-income housing fund. Of the remaining $2.5 million, half goes to pay for debt incurred for past projects.

That leaves $1.25 million, with the state next week taking $1.19 million.

"It basically takes everything from that one year," Claremont City Manger Jeff Parker said.

That means Claremont will lay off its only full-time employee focused solely on economic development.

Claremont's City Hall has resigned itself to coughing up that $1.19 million Parker alluded to. The City's website has this news blurb:

Claremont Will Pay State Redevelopment Funds (May 6, 2010)

On Tuesday, May 4, 2010, the City was notified of the decision in the CRA lawsuit against the State of California. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly upheld AB X4 26, the state budget bill passed in July 2009 as part of the 2009-10 state budget that requires redevelopment agencies statewide to transfer $2.05 billion in local redevelopment funds over the next two years.Anticipating this decision, the City of Claremont put aside $1.2 million and is prepared to make the payment by the May 10 deadline.

Advocates of smaller government should be happy. Because of Sacramento's financial ineptitude, along with the refusal of state legislators to come up with reality-based methods for balancing the state's budget, every level of California government will have to enact even more austerity measures in the coming year. Those cuts will likely include such things as releasing older prisoners to reduce the state's prison costs and even taking a look at reforming public pensions.

Anti-tax groups won't be pleased, though, with the revenue side of the budget equation. Along with more cuts in services, the state will have to find replacement income to help reduce its deficit. Californians will soon have a clear picture of the exact size of that deficit when Governor Schwarzenegger's May budget revision (the "budget revise") is released.

The state's deficit is almost certainly to increase when the May revise comes out. Last week, the LA Times reported that the state's tax revenues were down 30% year-over-year. That translates to $3 billion, so the hard times are likely to continue a while more.

Peppertree Square Facelift in the Offing

Peppertree Square, the small shopping center at the southeast corner of Arrow Hwy. and Indian Hill Blvd., is almost ready for its long-overdue renovation. The City's website has all the information, along with a couple watercolor renderings of what the center will look like.

Here's what the City has to say about the matter:

Peppertree Square Redevelopment Plans (Jan 21, 2010)

The City of Claremont is working closely with the property owners and broker of the Peppertree Square Shopping Center, located at the southeast corner of Indian Hill Boulevard and Arrow Highway, to improve the site and attract new tenants. Based on feedback from the community, the City, property owners, and broker have developed a plan to renovate the center and bring in two anchor tenants and several small retail shops. In a gap analysis performed earlier this year, residents expressed a desire for a grocery store in the southern portion of the city.

The broker is in negotiations with a major pharmacy and grocery store to occupy the two proposed major vacancies. The grocery tenant's lease is conditioned upon a pharmacy locating into the center. The pharmacy interested in the site requires a drive thru. Staff will be bringing a drive thru ordinance to the City Council which would allow bank and pharmacy drive thrus in the City upon securing a conditional use permit.

Wheeler Architects is preparing the design for the renovation which will be reviewed by the Architectural Commission, Planning Commission, and Council before final approval. The proposed renovations will include new construction and renovation of some of the existing retail space.

The Peppertree renovation has dragged on for almost two years now, and the drive thru may be a sticking point. Claremont bans these, and we suspect that a few people - former mayor and self-appointed town historian Judy Wright comes to mind - would strongly oppose an ordinance allowing for drive thrus. We'll see if the need for sales tax revenue trumps the desire to maintain Claremont's ban.

City Council Meeting Tonight

The Claremont City Council meets tonight, beginning with a closed session meeting at 5:15pm. The closed session involves negotiations for the 2.66-acre property on Base Line Rd. 1000 feet east of Towne Ave. One other item on the closed session agenda is litigation involving L.A. County and the county's Flood Control District.

The regular session begins at 6:30pm. The agenda seems fairly light. A few items stand out:

• Ginger Elliot, the executive director for Claremont Heritage, will be honored at the beginning of the meeting for her work with Heritage.
  
  
• The City has awarded a three-year contract for custodial services in city-owned buildings and park restrooms to Great Cleaning Services, Inc., an Irvine-based company.
  
  
• In accordance with California Redevelopment Law, Claremont has updated its five-year Redevelopment Implementation Plan for 2010-2014. This one is sure to upset some people, especially who feel that redevelopment ought to be retired in Claremont. Others who might not like this are those opposed to the City's use of eminent domain to take property from one private party in order to give it over for another private party's use.
  

If you'd rather stay in, you can watch the council meeting here.

Claremont City Council
City Hall - Council Chambers
225 Second Street
Claremont, CA 91711

Affordable Housing Moves Forward

The College Ave. affordable housing project cleared another hurdle Wednesday night when the Claremont Architectural Commission gave its conditional approval on a 4-2 vote.

Wes Woods explained the vote in a Daily Bulletin article:

The commission - which approved the project by a 4 to 2 vote but requiring that several conditions still had to be met, including details on the project's color, windows, soundwall, carport, roofing and other details.

The Claremont Redevelopment Agency and the Jamboree Housing Corp. - the project's applicants - told the commission they may appeal the conditions.

"In the next day or so, we'll evaluate and see if we want to come back here, but we need to consult with other people," said Brian Desatnik, housing and redevelopment manager.

You can see why the Architectural Commission would want to impose their conditions. The lack of important architectural details would seem to make it difficult for the commission to do its job. But, the City and Mr. Desatnik have a lot of pressure on them from the League of Women Voters and others to get to project done. So, details or no, on we go.

If you haven't reviewed them, the Insider has posted the project plans here.

Woods' article said a number of residents spoke out against the project, citing things like cost and child safety (we're not sure if this refers to concerns about kids having to deal with traffic or the nearby Metrolink or some other issue). Another resident complained about the lack of an environmental impact report for the project.

The housing units are being built by Jamboree Housing Corp. and the Claremont Redevelopment Agency (whose board consists of Claremont's five councilmembers and whose executive director is City Manager Jeff Parker). Having already been approved by the Planning Commission, the matter moves onto the City Council, probably by next Tuesday, according to the Woods piece. You can see how this works - CRA project has to be approved by the City Council, which is the CRA.

Getting the project to the council by Tuesday is important because the council and city commissions go dark in August for their traditional summer break. If the College Ave. project doesn't get to the council next week, it'll have to wait until September. Also, getting it done in July means Desatnik and the city staff assigned to the project have all of August to work with less scrutiny than the rest of the year because people are preoccupied with vacations and recreation.

Claremont's other August tradition is to get hot button issues shaped and fully dressed by staff during the council break. Affordable housing is no different. You can expect Desatnik to be ready in September to rattle off answers to critics' questions with absolute confidence and certitude, no matter how substantive those responses may or may not be.