Santa PaulaAgendaTo the Editor:Re: July 28, 2008 City Council Meeting – Low Income Housing MoratoriumI would like to comment on last Monday’s Low-Income Housing Moratorium which took place as part of the City Council’s agenda. Present were proponents and opponents of the Housing Moratorium which would take place via a city council vote.Essentially, the proponents of the “Moratorium” were speaking from an economic standpoint whereas the opponents of the “moratorium” were speaking through the prism of racism. I was there to hear and observe all the speakers of which I was a part. I agree with the argument that Mr. Richard Main stated: “an issue never discussed whether or not living in the United States legally, no matter from what country they come from should be allowed to live in subsidized housing”. Of course those opposing the moratorium are open borders and illegal proponents. One can liken the situation with the “sub-prime debacle” with the over-saturation of low-income housing in Santa Paula; the federal government allowed the “housing bubble” to materialize and is now putting a band-aid on the terminally ill. It was frustrating to listen to Councilman Aguirre’s socialistic solution to the endemic problem that exists in Santa Paula; with this ideology entrenched in our community we will join the ranks of other cities in California filing for bankruptcy. Andrew F. CastanedaSanta PaulaA simple solutionTo the Editor:I have a simple, albeit self-serving, solution to the problem of the need of low-income housing problems of Santa Paula. The City of Santa Paula AND Cabrillo AND Limoneira should consider purchasing the Santa Paula West Mobile Home Park. The City would be rid of a nuisance (the owner of the park) who has already caused years of expensive litigation, not to mention hard feelings from those of us having to bear the pass-throughs. Cabrillo and Limoneira could work in concert in addressing the need for low-income housing for workers of our agricultural industry. The cost of purchase could be split three ways, lessening the expense for all concerned.There are approximately 25 mobile homes for sale in this park at this time – and this is where the self-serving portion of my letter shows itself – including mine. I have been attempting to sell mine for over a year. I have dropped the price twice and am now offering an incentive of six months free space rent with the purchase. I would gladly sublet my home for the basic space rent; however, the owner prohibits this under the guise of mobile home law or regulations or some such thing. He also requires (?) a new buyer to qualify for purchase by earning the exorbitant amount of FIVE times the amount of space rent PLUS $100. What?, you say. How much? I know, I know. Listen, my basic space rent, at this particular time – it will soon rise again! – is $737 per month. That means that if I had a potential buyer – which I do not – he or she would have to earn, at the very least, $3,785 per month just for the space rent. That doesn’t cover the loan for the home. I am probably shooting myself in the foot here, but if that sounds like a lot to you, imagine how I feel.I just thought I would put this idea out there as an answer for the City (who approved the increases in rent under the threat of constant litigation which all park owners have come to wield like a weapon while crying they are not receiving a fair return on their investment – like anyone is getting a fair return on investments in today’s economy, including mobile home owners); and for Cabrillo and Limoneira, who are trying to do the right thing.At any rate, the park is here. The location is perfect for this use. Moreover, I am sure the owner would be willing to deal for such a good cause and you would be helping a great many folks!Just think about it! A win-win situation if ever I saw one.Mary ThrasherSanta PaulaP.S. Any brilliant pro-bono lawyer out there that is interested in taking us under his or her wing is welcome to contact us.
Letters to the Editor
August 01, 2008
Opinion
Santa Paula needs balanced housing
To the Editor:Santa Paula is suffering from a crisis of perception. We are viewed as a poor, impoverished community with excessive numbers of low-income housing. Over half of our city is in a “Redevelopment” area. Everything below Santa Paula Street, and even up to Virginia Terrace in some areas is in the Redevelopment Area. We receive $3.4 million annually for redevelopment, but very little goes to any renovations or improvements. Most of the money goes to repay debt from long forgotten projects, or is returned to the County for tax purposes. Little or nothing gets done, and the cycle of poverty continues.We do have some reason to be optimistic. Development in Adams Preserve and East Area 1 will substantially increase our tax base. Just as important, this will change our character from an old impoverished community to one of modern, affordable housing, including some very high end housing with an equally high tax base and minimal impact on city services – that’s a good thing!!Together with our historic treasures (the airport, our museums, agriculture, good climate, and friendly people), we have an opportunity to revitalize Santa Paula. Along with our very successful special events, we can look forward to once again showcasing our beautiful city.New housing brings more revenue, improved schools, and hope for our children. Education and hard work are the keys to escaping the cycle of poverty. It worked for me as a child growing up here, living in old, crowded apartment buildings and farm worker housing. And it will work for our kids today.We need better schools and affordable housing for everyone, including the working poor and our farm workers. Agri-business must do its part as does Limoneira with soon to be 300 units for its employees.Is a moratorium on low-income development the answer? I’m not sure, but I do know that we need balance and something must be done to address current livings conditions. Far too many families live in illegally converted garages, campers, and even tool sheds – some with no access to sanitary facilities. No one should live in such conditions. We must aggressively enforce our building codes if we are ever to reduce blight and excessive street parking in our city.Adoption of a moratorium will undoubtedly lead to more litigation, more wasted resources, and lost time. We must use our blueprint housing element and move forward in partnership with developers, both for profit and non-profit, and engage in a process of revitalization that works for everyone. Only with enforcement of existing building codes and new revenue from development can we escape the cycle of poverty that has paralyzed our city and divided our citizens.Santa Paulans are reasonable people. We accept our responsibility to do our fair share to provide housing for the poor, disabled, and the elderly. However, if our housing element is out of balance, we all lose as we become a non-sustaining community. We cannot let that happen. We must do what is right for everyone which is a reasonable housing balance addressing the needs of all our citizens.Fred RobinsonSanta PaulaBalloon FestivalTo the Editor:Carla! Carla! Carla! What else can you say to compliment a person and her staff for such a magnificent job creating the Balloon Festival!It is so wonderful to see people like Carla Edwards devote so much time creating an event that shows Santa Paula at its best, and hopefully will become an annual event.I found it refreshing to talk to people, from my neighbor and his granddaughter to a lady from Hemet who said is this Santa Paula? And I could say yes it is!Between the Chamber and the EDAC (Economic Development Advisory Committee) we seem to be on the right track to improving the image of Santa Paula as “Hometown USA”, to quote a Hollywood set director.What’s next? The Chamber of Commerce dancing under the stars. This year with a Hollywood theme and destined to be bigger than last year. See you there!Chuck Mears
