Montebello passes budget without ranc...

Montebello passes budget without rancor this year

There are 198 comments on the Whittier Daily News story from Jun 27, 2013, titled Montebello passes budget without rancor this year. In it, Whittier Daily News reports that:

A year ago, the City Council needed a long, raucous meeting to approve a budget.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Whittier Daily News.

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

#63 Jul 11, 2013
Theolona Ranger wrote:
Cook-Hill could get permits TODAY to build single family homes (like those in the La Merced or Racquet Mountain areas)in the Hills, if they wanted to.
Actually I disagree.
PXP/ Montebello Land Company, Cook Hill do not plan on R1 single family dwellings which have to be on lots at least 6,000 sq ft.
They cannot build multiple dwellings on one big project size lot and only provide "air rights" and no titles to individual properties.
They would have to have R-3 zoning or a Planed Unit Development which is what they are going for with their (un) "specific plan".
They would have to have a condo association
Condominium land ownership is incompatible with the current R1 zoning.
Without selling lots there is no project possible without rezoning.
The Citizens of Montebello would refenderize any attempt at ticky tacky Condo zoning in the hills
You are right as to the lot size. I should have been more precise in stating that they could get the permits to build single family homes like those in the La Merced and Racquet Mountain areas on the larger lots (if they would sell the land) today as opposed to their high density condominium housing proposal.

I was thinking of the big picture. Thanks for the admonishment.
Somebody Has to Say It

San Gabriel, CA

#64 Jul 11, 2013
The common argument for those in favor of the Cook-Hill Hills Development is that Montebello Needs the Money the project will rake in. If you fall into this category, you need to drill down (pun intended) a little deeper and look at the numbers.

If Cook-Hill is able to sell all of the homes at their full (very optimistic) asking prices, that would generate about $7 Million in total property taxes collected. Sounds pretty good so far, right?!

What you have to remember is that the State of California takes 90% of that $7 Million and a city only gets a little less than 10% of the property tax that is collected.

So, at best, Montebello would end up with only about $700,000 and would still have to pay about $600,000 in municipal services for the new development, leaving a $100,000 profit for the city. Yippeeee! A windfall!!

Now, if the new residents did all of their shopping in Montebello, the city would receive sales tax revenue. So that would help. Close proximity to the 60 Freeway makes it easy for those residents to shop elsewhere, and unless they wanted their new car to be either a Ford or a Chevrolet, they would have to buy a big ticket item like that in Alhambra, Cerritos or elsewhere.

Personally, I believe that after operating 100 years as an oil field, the hills are too toxic for people to either live or play, and should not be inhabited. Shame on Frank Gomez for advocating for these homes to be built. If anyone does, this chemistry professor knows just how unsafe this site is and will continue to be.

build build build

Los Angeles, CA

#65 Jul 12, 2013
Sounds like a straight up business opportunity. If it is safe and makes money for the city then build homes in the hills. Enough from the tree huggers talking about building a park, sanctuary, trails. Debate will be decided by a council who thinks long term; current majority is weak and only cares about their monthly stipend. I say, kick the mayor and Barajas out. Molinari looks like he is falling asleep up there. How can he be making sound decisions?

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

#66 Jul 12, 2013
I'm still waiting for any supporter to give some objectively verifiable independent financial analysis.

So far, only the company who wants to make a profit has put out uncorroborated and speculative estimates designed to try to get the proposal approved.

Anyone believe any condos, but especially substandard ones, will sell for an average of $720,000? Anyone else believe that this will be the first residential condo development to ever make more money than it costs?

Doesn't anyone want Montebello residents to keep their own Police and Fire departments? Must we take money from them to give to carpetbaggers? Is this a backdoor way to force the city to go county for police and fire, by saddling the city with the financial millstone of a costly development?
Up or down vote

Montebello, CA

#67 Jul 12, 2013
I cant stop from laughing every time 42 yr North Mtb resident posts. His last paragraph is not only assumptive but ridiculous. Sign this guy up at the comedy store. Hah hah!
Montebello Businessperson

Ojai, CA

#68 Jul 14, 2013
The Chamber has the best financial interests of the city in mind. The city cannot afford the current cost of police and fire, so something must be done to bring the cost under control.

One way or another, building the Montebello Hills Community will do it.
Up or down vote

Montebello, CA

#69 Jul 14, 2013
Montebello businessperson sounds like a good businessperson. If any of the council is not progressive to keep this city afloat vote them OUT.
Huh

Alhambra, CA

#70 Jul 14, 2013
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
The Chamber has the best financial interests of the city in mind. The city cannot afford the current cost of police and fire, so something must be done to bring the cost under control.
One way or another, building the Montebello Hills Community will do it.
Meanwhile in a galaxy far, far, far away ....

Proposed housing project in Montebello hills may be coming to a head
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
What is with these people that are against progress in Montebello?

It doesn't matter if all the plants and animals are killed, polluted dust goes all over the city, traffic gets worse, and all the other problems.

It doesn't matter that everyone hates this project.

It doesn't even matter if the city goes bankrupt from the cost of this development and people lose value of their houses.

What matters is who owns the land and is what they want to do with it legal. This is not public land. Building homes is legal. Making money selling those homes on their own land is legal, and it doesn't matter where the landowners and developers live. People can do what they want with their own land, even if others don't like it.

THAT IS THE AMERICAN WAY!

Tell the treehuggers and other footdraggers to get over it and let someone build nice homes for those who want them. This isn't communist russia, so if you can't solve Montebello's problems, get out of the way of those who can and let businesspeople try. If you don't like the homes, don't buy one, but don't stop progress. There is a gold mine in the hills, and its owners deserve to get it. I'm sure there will be enough profit to spread around. Haven't you heard of 'trickle-down economics'?
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/montebello-ca...
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
It doesn't matter if the condos only sell for $1 each. If the landowner wants to sell them for that amount, then he should be able to do it. It's his land!

It doesn't matter if this high end housing development forces the city into bankruptcy.

Why shouldn't this landowner be denied the chance to make money from his land like those who developed Sun-Ray Estates, Racquet Mountain I and II, and Brighton Hills did?

Just because the money isn't rolling into city hall anymore doesn't mean that we stop letting developers make a profit. We don't live under some soviet 5 year plan where the state rules all. In the USA the People Rule!

If this project costs the city their fire and police departments, then they cost too much anyway. I say Just Do It and let the chips fall where they may.

The developer has spent thousands of $$$ garnering good will and millions of $$$$ on salaries and reports for years and years, and they deserve a return on their investment, like any businessman does.

Did anyone ask those developers of those other developments how much their developments would cost the city? I don't think so. The economics of residential developments are very well known. Like someone said, why do you think they pump so much money into the city? A landowner deserves to make money on any legal development they want to do.
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/montebello-ca...
Huh

Alhambra, CA

#71 Jul 14, 2013
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
The Chamber has the BEST FINANCIAL INTERESTS of the city in mind.
Dead plants and animals

Polluted dust

Traffic

"Other problems"

Everyone hates the project

City goes BANKRUPT

Lost property values

Developers "make a profit" (Not the city)

"If this project costs the city their fire and police departments, then they cost too much anyway. I say Just Do It and LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY."

PAY FOR PLAY!!!!!

Is "Montebello Businessperson" really speaking on behalf of the Montebello Chamber of Commerce?
about time

Los Angeles, CA

#72 Jul 15, 2013
Huh wrote:
Dead plants and animals

Polluted dust

Traffic

"Other problems"

Everyone hates the project

City goes BANKRUPT

Lost property values

Developers "make a profit" (Not the city)

"If this project costs the city their fire and police departments, then they cost too much anyway. I say Just Do It and LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY."

PAY FOR PLAY!!!!!

Is "Montebello Businessperson" really speaking on behalf of the Montebello Chamber of Commerce?
Sounds to me like he is speaking on the behalf of old America and the free market system.
One where property rights and contracts were honored.

Too bad that America has been replaced by tree hugging leftists who, especially in this city, are so
Far in favor of "their way" that any thing said contrary is met by an immense amount of disdain wrapped in fancy words to make the owner of those words sound educated.

Who owns the land?
Produce a valid report stating that the living up there would be safe.

Pay the city the millions in one time permit fees, open a park up there, save some space for retail and make the city of montebello the place to be.

Stop stopping progress because of the beautiful hills that can not be enjoyed anyway.

Old America needs to come back for new America to stay as the worlds power. Rejecting business and revenue at a time like this is foolish at best.

Don't kid yourselves council. The city is not wealthy. The city is barely making it financially.

Lets have some positive change

Make sure the development would be beneficial and safe for future residents and we can begin to see a new montebello, not the same old tired non sense.

And I'll agree, if the police and fire are too expensive. Lets go county.

Some of the safest cities in la and Orange County are sheriff patrolled.
about time

Los Angeles, CA

#73 Jul 15, 2013
good points wrote:
<quoted text>That's true . There's not a Costco, movie theatre and mall right there.

Look, I don't give a crap either way. If it helps financially , do it. If city services get extended or improved or enhanced because of it , do it.

I'm not going to be on either side of the fence. All of my statements are IF it helps , IF its profitable , IF city services are improved.

Everyone that is on the "save the hills" side is just way too biased to be objective. I'm sure their assertions are based in fact but its just overbearing at times.

But don't tell everyone here (all 4 of us) that people that come in wont shop in Montebello when there is a Costco, sears , mall, gas station, Applebee's , movie theatre within a minutes walk. And a Von's down the hill.

Here is where you and I would probably agree (maybe): the city can benefit mug more from full retail. A restaurant row up there would be awesome.

Within the next 100 years all of cities open spaces will be developed. It's sad, but its America. The population grows, more housing is needed, more retail is needed to feed, clothe and entertain those people . Believe me , I know it sucks but its the world we live in. If we can improve our cities finances in the process of the inevitable progress , JUST DO IT.

Cue everyone jumping down my throat for having and differing opinion..... now
Best post on here . Not taking a side and stating what I have said. Present facts but stop trying to sound smart and belittle the other side . I respect the save the hills group and their opinion.

We just don't agree.

IF its safe and profitable , build
Huh

Alhambra, CA

#74 Jul 15, 2013
about time wrote:
<quoted text>
Best post on here . Not taking a side and stating what I have said. Present facts but stop trying to sound smart and belittle the other side . I respect the save the hills group and their opinion.
We just don't agree.
IF its safe and profitable , build
It's the developer's job to "produce a valid report stating that the living up there would be safe", that's according to state law and not anybody's "opinion." If you want to disagree with somebody, disagree with the lawmakers in Sacramento who passed one of the toughest environmental laws in the country.

IF this was a "safe" project, it would have been built already.

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

#75 Jul 16, 2013
about time wrote:
<quoted text>
I respect the save the hills group and their opinion.
We just don't agree.
IF its safe and profitable , build
As far as I can determine, the Save the Montebello Hills group has no opinions about the proposed condo development.

Almost all they have are the facts supplied by (mainly) the developer, facts supplied by the oil field operator, facts supplied by numerous governmental, non-profit groups, public service agencies and technical experts that are nearly unanimous in saying that this proposal is, at best, flawed and incomplete, and, at worst, deadly and budget draining.

Again, as far as I can tell, only the supporters have opinions about the proposed condo development, as there aren't any objectively verifiable facts to support it.

BTW, the objectively verifiable facts indicate the proposed development would be unsafe and unprofitable (for the city and its residents).

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

#76 Jul 16, 2013
Professional Firefighters have a new name for developments like the proposed condo project that has come to light after the death of the 19 Firefighters in Arizona.

They call them 'Suicide Subdivisions.'

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/natio...

"Along with an extended drought and wild weather extremes, fire profilers have to take into account a new, explosive fuel type on the Western landscape: houses. By the Forest Service's reckoning, nearly one-third of the homes now built in the United States are on the fringe of settled areas, where timber and chaparral meet stucco and cul-de-sacs.

These houses in fire-prone zones are referred to by some fire professionals as SUICIDE SUBDIVISIONS (my capitals), and their popularity drives up the cost and complication of firefighting.

Not only are more and more Americans living in harm's way on the edges of development, but they also have caused about 85% of wildfires in the U.S. in the last decade."

“Hilltop Park Above All”

Since: Sep 08

Montebello, CA

#77 Jul 16, 2013
The proposed development would be ringed by chaparral. The developer had the option to make the entire nature preserve on the eastern end of the development, but reportedly decided on the 'ring' approach to preclude retail commercial development along Montebello Blvd.

No opinions here, just facts and reports.
Montebello Businessperson

Ojai, CA

#78 Jul 16, 2013
The city needs this development to concentrate its attention on the budget and make the hard choices the residents refuse to make.

The developer has invested thousands in this community to be able to build upscale homes and I find it offensive that you would compare them to prostitutes. You should apologize to the good people that have done nothing but help those who needed their help.

The landowners deserve to make money on their land legally, and I believe they would have a strong legal case against the city if the development were to be refused for trivial reasons.
Huh

Alhambra, CA

#79 Jul 16, 2013
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
The city needs this development to concentrate its attention on the budget and make the hard choices the residents refuse to make.
The developer has invested thousands in this community to be able to build upscale homes and I find it offensive that you would compare them to prostitutes. You should apologize to the good people that have done nothing but help those who needed their help.
The landowners deserve to make money on their land legally, and I believe they would have a strong legal case against the city if the development were to be refused for trivial reasons.
I didn't compare the developers to prostitutes, I meant the City of Montebello would be acting like a prostitute IF it approves this project just because "the developer has invested thousands in this community to be able to build upscale homes."

Throwing money around town doesn't guarantee them a yes vote.
Montebello Businessperson wrote:
I believe they would have a strong legal case against the city if the development were to be refused for trivial reasons.
That's why the City of Montebello hired it's own lawyers.
trash talk

United States

#80 Jul 17, 2013
about time asks
Who owns the land?
Produce a valid report stating that the living up there would be safe.
EXACTLY and read the fine print

"Stop stopping progress because of the beautiful hills that can not be enjoyed anyway."

Can not be enjoyed anyway???
Only because PXP built a fence around the hills for the very first time.
Back when Chevron owned the hills they were freely open to the public, hikers, picnics, Scouts overnights been there- done that

"Make sure the development would be beneficial and safe for future residents and we can begin to see a new montebello, not the same old tired non- sense."
Let's hope the new EIR and Specify Plan are not as insufficient and biased as the first one- read carefully (skeptically?) when it comes out.
And determine what is hidden and left out.

"IF its safe and profitable , build "
Hope you mean profitable for the City and increased property values for the homeowners

agree with HUH however if the gang of three in power it would have been built already and the developer long gone with the loot
trash talk

United States

#81 Jul 17, 2013
Montebello businesspersona is either not one or a poor one or should get a better advisor.
A general plan amendment- such as the approval of a Specific Plan is "discretionary" not much chance of a lawsuit prevailing.
Same with a Zone change- and there can be no condos (including "detached deluxe townehomes") without.

Upscale homes with no nearby upscale shopping?
Who shops at Montebello Mall?

Who was advocating upscale Section 8 housing?
Hong Kong owned rentals?
LEAD BY EXAMPLE

Alhambra, CA

#82 Jul 31, 2013
Does the residence/community have the actual numbers and debt provided on paper? Or does the city reproduce reports to reflect what they want the residence to see?
Providing the copies of original statements and expenditure logs would give truth to the budget and where the city stands, rather than recreating a report. Give the city residence the actual statements to reflect the budget.
This will allow the residence and community to be well informed and dismiss any questionalble items that may or may not be inculded in the budget.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Montebello Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Citizen Academy 7 hr Montebello Kind O... 1
Councilwoman Vanessa Delgado Attempted to Extor... 16 hr Big Mistake 9
Fireworks in Montebello (Jun '06) Tue USMC 32
RON Calderon will plead GUILTY Friday! Tue Truth Squad 4
Montebello unprepared Tue Reality 3
Montebello City Council Tue Reality 9
Clueless Delgado Tue Anonymous 4

Montebello Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Montebello Mortgages