However, the second half of what we've been hearing is that nobody new has been brought in to continue the process of finding someone to take the place. The word being that the current and rather aesthetically indifferent owners haven't quite decided exactly what it is they want to do with the troubled nursing facility.
The timing issue does raise some questions, though. Having the deal with the Realtor hired to sell the place scheduled to run out just after the Sierra Madre election had taken place does make it all seem like the effort was a little on the insincere side. And perhaps that was the time Fish Construction knew they might want to be reviewing their options? More news on this story as it becomes available.
Why I will never vote 'yes' on a state bond issue again: We all had a good laugh over Hasan Ikhrata's brilliant idea at the recent La Quinta/SCAG conglomeration. That being since redevelopment funds were becoming increasingly scarce these days due to Sacramento confiscations, incentives would need to be put into place to encourage cities to work towards sustainability. Which I guess is why Hasan unveiled the notion that a $2 million dollar prize could be made available so that cities can compete for big cash prizes for appropriate planning. The criteria for winning being that you make your city as spectacularly compliant to the demands of SB 375 as possible.
But did you know that there are some other ways to plan your way to Sacramento gold? Apparently there is something known as the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentives Program, and they are taking applications to win the big bucks as we type. Known as SB 732, and also the brainchild of California State Senator Darrell Steinberg, it offers an Ikhratian carrot to those cities and towns feeling the SB 375 stick. Here are how the prize criteria break down:
The sum of five hundred eighty million dollars ($580,000,000) shall be available for improving the sustainability and livability of California's communities through investment in natural resources. The purpose of this chapter include reducing urban communities' contribution to global warming and increasing their adaptability to climate change while improving the quality of life in those communities.
Just so you know, this money became available when Proposition 84 was passed by the voters. Originally designed to help keep our water pure and our beaches clean, Prop 84 apparently has now become (at least in part) a grant program for cities that are willing to work to get their planning right with AB 32 and SB 375. Here is how this is described:
The Sustainable Communities Planning Grant is funded by Proposition 84, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006. It added Division 43 to the Public Resources Code, Chapter 9, Sustainable Communities and Climate Change Reduction Section 75065(a), authorizing the Legislature to appropriate $90 million for planning grants and planning incentives that reduce energy consumption, conserve water, improve air quality, and provide other community benefits.
So when you cast your 'yes' vote on Prop 84, all with the intent of cleaning up beaches and making the rivers nice, would you have ever dreamed that you were also voting for something that would provide money to city planners hellbent on bringing high density development to places like Sierra Madre? And, to take this to its logical extreme, perhaps the reason "Go Slow Joe" Mosca would want to spend $300,000 on consultants to place SB 375 elements into our General Plan is so that he can try and claim some of these Prop 84 moneys?
Like I said, no more 'yes' votes on state bond issues for me. Apparently once these bonds are approved and the funds effectively borrowed, you never can tell what the money will be used for.
Something rather unbelievable. You might recall our discussions of a California Assemblyman by the name of Isadore Hall III. He was the gentleman who authored a bill that made it possible for Ed Roski Jr. to avoid the ignominy of having to suffer CEQA reviews before he could build an NFL Stadium and adjacent shopping mall in City of Industry. The real purpose of Hall's bill being to cut off at the knees any attempt by certain concerned area residents to tie the boondoggle up in court until the environmental and sustainability (to use the jargon) issues were worked out. We wrote about this in October of 2009, and you can access the article here.
Well, it turns out that Assemblyman Hall is continuing his fine work even today. Concerned about preserving the legacy of a former State Legislator, he has now proposed a bill that would rename a portion of the 405 Freeway the Kevin Murray Highway. Kevin Murray being a fellow who served for 8 years in the state legislature, forced to retire in 2006 due to term limits. Here is how columnist Robert Rector describes the possible ramifications of the honor Hall wishes to bestow upon his esteemed colleague:
According to Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters (Murray's) legislative career was about average. He carried a few significant bills, including one aimed at encouraging installations of solar energy panels on roofs. Murray also carried some questionable measures, such as one stemming from the messy divorce of Southern California supermarket tycoon and major political donor Ron Burkle, to close public access to legal documents in divorce cases.
Unfortunately, Murray joined the politicians-with-their-pants-down brotherhood when a Los Angeles County Park Police officer found him with a prostitute in Murray's state-leased black Corvette, parked outside John Anson Ford Theater just after he was sworn in as a state senator. Apparently that qualifies him for everlasting commemoration, at least in Hall's eyes.
These little insights into the thinking of the Legislative Eminences currently wrestling with California's myriad problems up in Sacramento really do give us hope that the future will be a better place.