Provide input on the ‘LOS OSOS’ Core Area concept May 8

What program cuts or level of services are you willing to accept? The vision plan so far has generated $60 million in bonded indebtedness.

The City is again "seeking" public input for the vision plan. On April 24, 2018, the Council received an extensive and detailed presentation created by city consultant SWA.

The presentation definitely was not borne out of the workshops.

If anyone participated in the golf course and open space workshops, not a single resident requested a hotel, nor did anyone suggest to replace the YMCA with a natatorium or wellness center. Yet, that was the presentation the Council had received. The public did not receive that staff report quietly, and the Council did not reject the plan.

I believe the additional public process is just for show and to avoid another public outcry. And this is my point. Imagine you are in a music hall and the entertainer asks the audience what songs they want to hear. Everyone yells out their favorite song, and like magic, the orchestra already has the music sheets on their stands. So, the entertainer manipulated the audience into believing that their wishes were granted, but the arrangements were already orchestrated prior to the show.

So instead of asking for additional input, the City needs to answer these questions:

1. Does this vision plan violate the CC&R's? If so, what is the remedy? It also appears that the Village Center will now be known as Los Osos.

2. Is the city using hyperbole to gain public approval? What is obtainable vs. financial reality? What are the legal rights of the property owners? Is the city destroying the viability of the shopping center to force compliance?

3. Does the City have compliance from the surrounding property owners or what means will the City use to gain compliance? Will permits to upgrade their properties be denied or withheld unless the property owners comply and conform to the heavy hand of government?

4. Lawsuits could take years to settle. I fail to see how the City has the legal right to pursue this Vision on private property. The Council needs to have a clear understanding of the lawful rights of all parties. Up to this point, the city attorney has been wrong on almost every aspect on the election lawsuits. I would get several written legal opinions from law firms not associated with Harper & Burns and not rely on the opinion of one city attorney or law firm that financially benefits from city lawsuits.

5. What is the remaining balance of the bond money? Also, the council and public should see an accounting of bond money expenditures to date.

6. What are the boundaries of this proposed 200 acre park? Does the city have the legal authority to turn a shopping center into a park?

7. What is the timeline for completion of the vision plan?

8. What is the cost to complete?

9. What is the expected return on investment?

10. Has there been an identified revenue stream to pay back the bonds?

11. Has there been an identified revenue stream to fund the infrastructure projects that are owned by the Santa Margarita Water District but paid by the City?

12. What is the timeline and projected cost for the City's other vision plan for the golf course and open space?

13. Can the City successfully evolve two vision plans? If so, how?

14. What are the funding sources for each of the two visions plans?

15. Regarding the golf course and open space vision plan, when did our Mission Viejo citizens express a desire to build three hotels?

Cathy Schlicht's questions regarding the Core Area plan are very appropriate and have the best interests of Mission Viejo taxpayers who are not pleased with the Council's "pie in the sky" plan to indebt the City with a $60 million bond using the Library building and Murray Center properties as collateral. City services, including regular upkeep on the median islands and landscaping, will be cut to help service the bond.

The "Core Area Plan" has no guaranteed income stream and relies on a set of unprofessional development plans backed by City employees with no commercial real estate development experience.

City Council spent $2 million to prep the Kaleidoscope site. This retail project was destined to be a failure from its first date of opening to its present condition of very high vacancies. It was necessary to get an out-of-country developer to pursue this undesirable location.

Mission Viejo's current decision makers will quietly retire or leave for more fertile opportunities, leaving the City and the taxpayers with another negative cash flow problem and two of its most prized facilities (the Library and the Murray Center) held hostage (collateral) by the bond deal.

City Council avoided placing the proposed project in voters' hands knowing it would be rejected.

Bored council members and city officials may have tired of performing their official duties and "needed" a new toy to play with at taxpayers' expense.

Voters should share their extreme displeasure during the next election.

I feel that the City Council needs to cool their jets on this plan. I would like to see a plan such as this AFTER monies have been saved to fund such a project, but not at the expense of letting other projects suffer, like tree trimming and landscape maintenance. I feel that the cart has been put before the horse, and we need to prioritize what the people want, not what the City Council wants. Do you know what I see? I see the Eucalyptus trees growing out of control, not being trimmed for about 12 years and counting. Those trees have become heavy and dangerous. We have a tree behind us that is overgrown and shadows our solar panels. I see rats running along the walls to get to lemons on the neighbor's lemon trees. The ankle-biter mosquitoes are out of control. Our yard has no standing water or pet food and/or water dishes sitting out, but the mosquitoes lay low in winter then begin the daily mission of entering the house. The last two years mosquitoes got into the house and have used the fish tank as their birthing center. The fish won't even eat them! What about the packs of coyotes running down our streets at night? Seriously?! We don't live in the boonies, we live in a city where these types of occurrences should be minimal if the city was doing its due diligence with city maintenance. Jeronimo Road looks great with all of the landscaping that has been done... when will the City get around to the mega trees lining Marguerite Parkway? Marguerite is the main street going into the hub of the City seat. Maintenance should be a no-brainer for the look of the city we have presently.
The city's house belongs to all of us. Earn, save, invest, then spend is my mantra. If there isn't money, using credit can be a disaster over time. Less is more until such a time when monies can flow into the city upgrade with less expense to the taxpayers pocketbooks. In the meantime, use my taxes to trim the trees on the Marguerite slopes. It affects my family and finances.