Search:

Blogs from Stan
Thank you for your support. I will do everything within my power to listen to your concerns and make the changes you would like to see. Working together, we can make our great City of Tehachapi a safe, healthy and productive community.
About packerfan


Real Name:
Stan Beckham
Cell:
(661)822-1907
Member Since:
May 29, 2006
Last Signed In:
June 28, 2008
Profile Views:
5942
Blog Views:
6819
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Your Tax Dollars At Waste, AGAIN!
Support Main Street Tehachapi
Requesting Investigative Audit of Tehachapi City Accounting
TUSD - Student Resource Officer
Response to Mr. Cajones
DON'T FORGET TO BE AT THE MEETING, IT'S YOUR FUTURE CITY
NEW CITY HALL & CIVIC CENTER - TOWN MEETING
New Hall Ambulance Station
Council Member Beckham Attends League of California Cities
HENRY L. SCHAEFFER ELECTION RESULTS
Archives
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL
packerfan - > Blogs from Stan -> Your Tax Dollars At Waste, AGAIN!
Your Tax Dollars At Waste, AGAIN!

Here’s an update for you from Monday’s City Council meeting. In the past we have discussed Mitigation Fees. That Blog has disappeared, so I’ll redefine. Mitigation Fees are the impact fees that the City collects on new construction to offset the cost of water, sewers, new roadways, etc.

 
Until recently under David James’ management, mitigation fees were NOT collected up front from the developer because there was some convoluted formula for calculating those fees based upon whether a retail space was going into a new development or a restaurant as each would have a different impact on the infrastructure.
 
Because these fees were not collected upfront from the developers and the developers were not disclosing these fees to their new tenants UNTIL AFTER the tenant had spent considerable money in tenant improvements, there have been three separate occasions where we as the City have made arrangements for the tenants to repay the City on a contract basis for these mitigation fees.
 
The two most recent instances were Que Pasa and Don Pericos. I argued during the council session that we, the City, were not a bank and the developers were pulling a fast one, to which Mr. Garrett agreed, and that we should not be loaning money even at 0% interest. Even the City Attorney agreed that he did not think the City should be in the business of loaning money. We wanted the developers to pay the fees and work out the situation with their tenants.
 
However, my esteemed colleagues, Mayor Grimes (at the time), Debra Hand, Phil Smith and Linda Vernon, in their infinite wisdom voted 4-1 against me to allow the tenants to repay the City at $3,200 per month over the next 3 years or roughly $115,000. NOW, Que Pasa has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The City is not listed as a creditor even though notice was given. That means the City most likely will never recoup these fees unless David James can come up with a solution.
 
Also, note, Don Pericos wants to renegotiate with the City because, expectedly, the $3,200 per month is eating into their operating margin. If you want to put a stop to this madness, please vote out Mayor Hand and Ed Grimes in November. Their ‘business usual’ attitude is wasting millions of dollars and with the State budget shortfalls that are looming we can’t afford Mayor Hand and Ed Grimes’ way of doing business any longer. Check out www.StanBeckham.com for more information.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by packerfan on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 628 times
53 comments from 13 users

1 2 3 4

posted by ProgressoDasani on Apr 9, 2008 at 02:04 PM

 I'm not Stan, and I don't know Stan.  I don't know anyone posting here.  I don't post under any other name.  Believe it or not, its more information than you deserve.

What you posted against me was this:

Soupwater you like to throw mud as well, do you have a plan to fix this issue?  Your the same as Stan.  All you can say is " Its a clown show, they suck, drunks, potheads, but I can do better. "

You used quotation marks, meaning you claimed I said those things.  I didn't.  If that isn't what you meant, then apologize!

posted by oohchild on Apr 9, 2008 at 02:29 PM

First, let me commend both PD & dk on an interesting & enlightening conversation. The "snarkiness" hasn't gotten out of hand, and there's lots of ideas to ponder. Thanks!

Second, I want to thank gube for the comic relief. Your confusing "mitigation" fees with "migration" fees, coupled with your obvious bias about the migrant issue, has given me quite a few chuckles to break up the intense dialogue. I can just imagine the chaos, should the city require "migration fees" in conjunction with a Mexican restaurant! You're too much, dude!

;-)

posted by dreamkiller on Apr 9, 2008 at 02:32 PM

 You do like to throw mud without having a positive statement about anything! Look at all your anti-cop post. I am sorry you don't like the fact that most people in this town support our police and we support positive change. Stan was voted in for change, he has become a joke. Sometimes change for the sake of change is not a good thing. We need to change things the right way without making hateful statements about anyone that disagrees with us. Well I got to go, I am meeting friends out at the Base to play Call of Duty4 . Soupwater you want to meet us there for a few games? You can even be on my team.  Gube you can come to..................How much fun it would be to have  the 3 of us in the same room after a few beers! Someone call the MP's!!!  lol

 

posted by dreamkiller on Apr 9, 2008 at 02:40 PM

 LOL oohchild!!!   Just think about how much Stan and the City could make charging just Mexican restaurants and immigrants! We have a lot of both. LOL

We have to many Mexican restaurants, that may be the reason behind Que Pasa's difficulty. The City should be recruiting a more diverse group of business types up here.

 

See soupwater... that was a jab at a problem ( to many Mexican restaurants) and a fix to the problem. ( recruit others) Your friend Stan needs to take note.

Gube likes controvsery. I think he will post on something he doesn't even think is right just to see others go off. ( I am that way sometimes, and gube is entertaining due to it)  Am I right Gube?

oh and soupwater I am sorry for calling you Stan, I know now your not!

posted by jer72 on Apr 9, 2008 at 03:09 PM

 This is reall a two problem issue.

First the city didn't coolect the fees when they should have. That is when the developer wanted to build. The developer could have then figured that into his rental price for the tenant. Then the city could have place a fee into the first business license that makes for the offset of the general mitigation fee to the type of business going to be ran. Each year after that the license would be a flat rate per business type as they have now.

The second problem that occured was that the developer was not fully honest with their tenants. They shoul have informed them that because of the new development their was also going to be a mitigation fee before they could open.

Being a person with a personal business online, I have a home occupation business license. I feel the fee to run this type of business license is rather high since I don't increase local traffic, there is no additional sewer use or water use.

posted by ProgressoDasani on Apr 9, 2008 at 03:12 PM

How's this for "solution"?  Hire two new council members committed to firing the head of the planning department, and hire a new planner with a strategy and a clue.  Then, fire the current city lawyer and hire a new one to give competent, non-blog-based advice on how to retrieve money from the developers who benefited from the sweetheart deal the fired folks gave them. 

OR we could follow your plan.  Keep doing what we are doing, ignore folks who point out that it is being done wrong, and then accuse the folks we ignored of bad manners and negativity when they point out that what they said would happen, happened.

Meanwhile, you still don't get it - Que Pasa won't be paying the town, the town isn't even listed as a creditor!  The town's "solution" (getting monthly payments from the ripped-off tenants) isn't going to work!

 

posted by dreamkiller on Apr 9, 2008 at 04:55 PM

 Soupwater- "How's this for "solution"?  Hire two new council members "

We tryed this solution when we voted Teel out and Stan in. All that got us was the happy little clown show, turned into a mean and hateful little clown show. Stan as done nothing but discredit his position as Councilman.

Soupwater- "Meanwhile, you still don't get it - Que Pasa won't be paying the town, the town isn't even listed as a creditor!  The town's "solution" (getting monthly payments from the ripped-off tenants) isn't going to work!"

What is going to work, making these tenants pay all the money now and run them to close their doors? Like Stan wants!  At lest now we are getting some of the fees payed back and have the sales tax as income. If we do Stan's plan we run these small new stores out and we don't get the sales tax and maybe not even the fees!

jer72- "Being a person with a personal business online, I have a home occupation business license. I feel the fee to run this type of business license is rather high since I don't increase local traffic, there is no additional sewer use or water use."

 Congrats to you jer72 you are but just one of the few people that have a home business that pays for a business license! Have you compared what you pay to what people in other cities like Tehachapi City pay? You have very little impact on the city. I do feel you should have to have a business license but the city should only be charging you what it cost them to administer the license.

Soupwater who is going to run for these two new council positions? Henry Shaffer? Don't get me wrong I love Henry and his store but he does not live in the city.

Next up is Jim Richards who is just more of Stan! He will just continue the mean and hateful crud that now comes out of Stan's mouth!

 

posted by packerfan on Apr 9, 2008 at 05:41 PM

dreamkiller, I thought you were going to play ball.  Game over?

ProgressoDassani you summed it up perfectly. But I want to know whose dreams dreamkiller is trying to kill, the 3500+ voters in this town?  Dreamkiller, do you think letting the old guard continue to take "Staff's recommendation" on the agenda items because your City Council Members haven’t done their homework so they rubber-stamp everything that comes across on the agenda is going to bring about change?

You have accused me of a lot of actions here up to and including criminal.  What do back that up with?  I did eat crow for having a private conversation many months ago about Mrs. Hand's proclivities and that was written about in the TN.  While there may be more to come on that front, I have not written anything or stated in any public venue that Grimes is a drunk.  Where are you getting your information?  From some of the things you have stated here it sounds like you have been sitting in on the council’s closed session meetings. That is a very bad ethical violation.

You accuse me of having a group like this is a bad thing. Yet Hand has her supporters aka group and I guess that’s OK with you? You know nothing of my supporters. They don’t blog, but I see them everyday out in the stores and restaurants. Funny, they all say the same thing…keep their feet to the fire and don’t give up. You are doing a good job. Come November we’ll be voting in some help for you. I will take their ‘up front in my face’ word over the word of someone too scared to reveal his identity.   As for Henry Schaeffer, Henry owns a home in Tehachapi and this man contributes a goodly sum to the tax base in Tehachapi and spends more time at his store than at his home. Remember Henry got 570 votes just on a write-in, if his name is on the ballot he’ll win by a mile. Don’t be surprised, there’s another dark horse coming in that will blow your mind.   You speak to the impact fees of Golden Hills. Why not the City? If you live in Golden Hills then you are not a part of the electorate of the City of Tehachapi.   You are wrong about a lot of the allegations of who is who on these blogs.  And, I haven't heard you say one word about how Mrs. Hand packs the council chambers with 20 +/- of her "friends" when she wants to give the impression of public opinion being for one of her pet projects.  She does this because she knows that no amount of petitions signed by those who cannot attend the meetings is going to supersede what the people present in the chamber say because Hand, Grimes, Smith and Vernon vote as a block rather than think and ask questions. That very action disenfranchises any other voter that could not make the meeting and have their voices heard.  It may be legal, but do you think this is ethical?   You can call this mudslinging if you like, I call it the truth and that is why you have this history of developers trying to stick it to upstart businesses and the City having to scramble to get paid back. If I hadn’t made a stink when the mitigation fees issue came up the first time for Que Pasa and Don Pericos, the City would still be doing things the same old way and we would have other future problems.   I am not trying to squeeze the little man so the City can get YOUR tax dollars back. You just don’t get it. This restaurant may have survived without going Chapter 11 if the City hadn’t stuck them with the $3,200 per month that is eating not only into the profit margin, but also into the operating budget. For your edification Chapter 11 is reorganization and does not mean the restaurant is going to close. It means that the secured creditors will get paid but only a portion of what they are owed and this will be decided by bankruptcy judge and administered by bankruptcy trustee. The City of Tehachapi has a contract for the mitigation fees, but we are an unsecured creditor. If the restaurant doesn’t close, we will likely never see a dime of the money that is owed.  Personally, I would like to see the City sue the developer for the fees, but that is not likely to happen with the council members you have now.   How would you like to come in as a small business and have a budget in place only to be told at the 11th hour, “By the way you’re going to have to pay the City $115,000 in mitigation fees that we didn’t collect from the developer and that the developer never disclosed to you!” That’s is just not right and that is why I am telling you folks about this. Dreamkiller, whether you like my personality or not, do the right thing for the citizens of Tehachapi. Your negative comments are your point of view and you are entitled, but for every one of yours I have 20 people telling me to keep doing what I’m doing and go after the *expletive deleted* and make the changes we need made. I guess I’ll listen to the 20 and hope that your sensitive nature can adjust.   Damn straight developer should have paid these fees in the first place. But, the City already had a procedure in place and the procedure was changed after the fact and after I “held their feet to the fire.”           You don’t believe that the $115,000 per store is correct, or you can’t recall something I said in chamber, and then listen to the recording. After I was voted into office I strongly pushed for recordings of the council meetings so you can now go back and hear for yourself EXACTLY what was said in each meeting.  Here's the link  http://www.tehachapicityhal...   If the link doesn't work, you can follow this path: www.tehachapicityhall.com Your Government>City Clerk>Minutes>City Council Meeting Audio   Since you haven't been attending the meetings regularly, or your recall is in need of updating, you will find that I told the ladies that approached who were concerned about their mitigation fees that the prudent thing to do would be to get an attorney and go after the developer.   Why did I do that and why am I holding the City responsible for this mess?  Because David James and the City Manager were not upfront with these businesses and they knew what the developers were doing to their tenants.  Because the developers and tenants already had an agreement, there was not much else that could be done at that point.  Leslie at Alpha Canine Sanctuary found a solution to her problem. She found a different location. This is close to my home and I am happy to say that she did a great job working with her lender and making an eyesore building into a great looking building and the work that she does is invaluable to the City.   As ProgressoDassani said, “How's this for "solution"?  Hire two new council members committed to firing the head of the planning department, and hire a new planner with a strategy and a clue.  Then, fire the current city lawyer and hire a new one to give competent, non-blog-based advice on how to retrieve money from the developers who benefited from the sweetheart deal the fired folks gave them.       

 

posted by dreamkiller on Apr 9, 2008 at 06:11 PM

The November that you got voted to office saw anyone with incumbent next to their name voted out. ( at all levels local to state)You were the only name on the ballot so you got the most votes. I am sure come this next November the voters will have learned from their mistake in voting you in. No ones wants to vote in a dark house, we want change but change in a good way. Your tactics have been scary to say the lest. You say you have supporters but where are they? They don't blog, they don't come to meetings, where are they? I find it hard to believe that anyone from the city knew that the developers where going to do this to their tenants and purposely kept it from the store owners. Do you really feel that everyone in city hall is out for themselves? Your way of thinking, that everyone but me is evil is horrible. Do you know how many people tell me everyday that they wished they didn't vote for you? It is sad that when people disagree with you, you resort to name calling! And for the record I have never been in a closed door city council meeting. Please keep blogging Stan that way us the voters of this City can learn the real you.

Stan-"While there may be more to come on that front, I have not written anything or stated in any public venue that Grimes is a drunk.  Where are you getting your information?  From some of the things you have stated here it sounds like you have been sitting in on the council’s closed session meetings. That is a very bad ethical violation."

So Stan did you say that Grimes is a drunk in closed door sessions? Is that what your trying to say?

Stan- As for Henry Schaeffer, Henry owns a home in Tehachapi and this man contributes a goodly sum to the tax base in Tehachapi and spends more time at his store than at his home.

Like I said I love Henry and I think he would be a great City Councilman, but having a camper in town and sleeping at your BVS home is not a city resident. So he can't legally run for office here in town. That would be illegal and unethical and you support this!

posted by packerfan on Apr 9, 2008 at 06:49 PM

dreamkiller why don't you answer some of the questions that I put to you?  What are you affraid of?  You are the one that has been doing the name calling and making some very serious accusations.  Again, how do you substantiate what you have been saying?  And, for the record you are twisting words.  I have never called anyone names in closed session.  That much I can say.

What the City Council has been condoning for years is what got me voted into office.  And do I think that most everyone that works or worked at city hall has gotten by with many things in the past and so does the public.  This is why I pull items off the "Consent Agenda" and I ask questions which is more than your former council did.  The public wants to know, "Why wouldn't the City Council approve an investigative audit?"  Just because they have tons of audits, that doesn't suffice for an investigative audit.  Why do we have people claiming that the City has "missapplied" bond funds?  Why are we having water problems?  These are questions that beg to be answered but are swept under the carpet.

As for Henry Schaeffer, I am sure that whatever he needs to do to be a legal candidate he will do and I would condone nothing less.  Again, you are making many unfounded accusations and I think the readers out here can draw their own conclusions and they certainly won't be in your favor.  You keep twisting the issue back to my nefarious character but you are not answering the questions.

Go ahead and make your posts.  I won't delete them, but I find your arguments without merit to the topic.  Let's here some real answers from you and how about some solutions?  You say I compain but don't have a solution.  Madam, I assert you are wrong and need to pay a bit more attention.

posted by jer72 on Apr 9, 2008 at 07:14 PM

 dreamkiller, Are you saying that I can complain about the fee? Do I pay more or less than those other people? Maybe, maybe not. But I live here and run my business not there. Did I say that the other people that do the same type of business as I do pay less? No, but I believe they would also say that same thing. Heck I didn't even say how much I paid. I will tell you that three years ago the fee was about a quart of what I paid last year. I will also say that three years ago they didn't require you to go to the planning meeting to get approval. They do now.

The funny thing is that I don't even know why you attacked my post when I didn't agree with anyone. I just gave out my opinion of the reasons the problem exists.

Stan,

I agreed with your vote on the mitigation fee. I think the city is not the place to finance business loans or act as a bank either.

ProgressoDassani,

I agree with you that we need to get Grimes, Smith, Hand, and Vernon out of there. I personly know and like Grimes and Phil and have know them for a while, but it is time for them to go. As for the planning board and David James goes, they all need to go in my opinion. Not just James but the entire board. They might mean well but I believe the time has came for change.

posted by dreamkiller on Apr 9, 2008 at 08:56 PM

 Jer72 you totally misunderstood my post. I am congratulating you for paying a tax when you could have never said anything to anyone about your in home business. Yes you should complain about this fee, but before you do find out what others are paying in other cities like Tehachapi. That way you can have some ammunition to use. Such as " I surveyed these 10 cities that are the same size as Tehachapi and this is what they charge." It would be hard for the city to fight such a fact as that. Just make sure you use "like" cities. Same size, same make up. Find out if the city employees union have determined caparisoned cities for negotiating their pay. If they did use the same cities for your caparisoned survey on fees. I do feel you should have to have a business license but the city should only be charging you what it cost them to administer the license. No more no less!!! I think you feel the same way right? Do you pay sales tax to the city? If you do, they should be more then happy to keep you in the city. As for going to the planning meeting to get approval for your in home business, I think that is a good thing. You would not want someone to open a petting zoo in the home next to you. Sorry petting zoo was kind of an over the top example but you know what I am saying.

As for the mitigation fees- the city could not just leave these small business in a lurch. I think it is good small town government to try to help. Did the city make a mistake not getting the fees from the developers up front? YES. Making the new business pay all fees right now is not a good solution. Changing the policy on fees and helping these new stores stay here was the right solution.

As for the planning board -I think they need to go as well, but only if we can find better people then them. I don't want to replace a bad thing with another bad thing. We did that and look where we are now. Same place different story.

posted by jer72 on Apr 9, 2008 at 10:14 PM

 Dreamkiller, I will say that I did take what you said in the wrong light. I will say that I felt you meant it as an attack because of the switch in the first part of you post to your comments to me.

I also agree that there should be a business license for home businesses just like any other business. I don't have a problem at all for this due to the fact many people could run businesses that can be rather questionable to the families in the area. Yes I do pay for the sales tax according to the license application and have no problem doing so. I do understand that many towns charge roughly the same for the license, but I believe in most cases it is much higher than it should be. The reason I mentioned the process and the raise in the fee was to point out the changes that were made over the period.

To be honest about the local government boards, they almost all need to be changed out. School, city, planning, park and rec, and many that slip my mind. I agree that swapping one bad for another is problematic and having been on the TVRPD board a few years back, one good person usually can't change much.

posted by seniorcitizen on Apr 10, 2008 at 10:34 AM

 Yes the developers should pay the basis fees up front. I think about $11,000.  But at the time of building the development He my not know who is moving in.  Once  he has a sign lease he should  collected the proper fees from the new business, and he paid the city  Great from now on.  What do we now?  The business Put a deposit and sign a lease for many years goes  to the city hall for their permit and are told the additional fee of $60.000.  and that what happen.  Yes tell the new business they can not open or as the city council work did work with the new business.  I feel they did the right thing at the time (Remember both business did not move into the development and the development loss the rent he would have he loss in the long run)

posted by ProgressoDasani on Apr 10, 2008 at 11:09 AM

Fees are paid to provide needed services to the building - without these services the buildings are basically worthless.  This value accures to the buiding - hence to the building owner -  not just to the first business that moves into it.

So the fees, just like construction costs, have to be paid by the developer, who must then calculate what rental income he needs to cover his costs and adjust his rental rates or profit margin according to the dictates of the market.

Now, how do you suppose this existing cock-a-mamie scheme of taking the entire fee from the first businesses entering the center happened?  From adopting the common practices of other towns?  Or more like this....

Developer Harold Hill : Gosh, Dave - these impact fees are so complicated!  One price for a resturant, another for a nail salon....hmmm...I just don't know.....Whattasay we do this instead....when I get my spaces leased out, I'll just have the businesses pay you the impact fee directly!  That way, it'll cut out the middle man, and you'll know exactly what business impact you're dealing with!

River City Rube Dave James : "Cut out the middle man?  That's a good thing ... I guess .... Sure, Mr. Hill - lets do it that way!

Developer Harold Hill : Great, Dave!  That'll really help!  I'll have my lawyer draw that up for us this afternoon!  Pleasure doing business with you!!

 

1 2 3 4

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.