Petitions Could Force Vote on Eminent Domain

Community activists cleared a major hurdle this week in their petition campaign to overturn a recent City Council decision to give the city’s Redevelopment Agency condemnation powers to clear the path for new development in South Montebello.

The petitions, submitted by a group called South Montebello Area Residents Together (SMART), contained enough valid signatures to qualify two measures for the ballot, Deputy City Clerk Carolyn Hall said Tuesday.

The City Council must now hold an election within 103 days, unless it decides to repeal the two ordinances that would give the Redevelopment Agency the power of eminent domain, Hall said. The council is scheduled to consider the matter Monday.

Hopes for Repeal

SMART Chairman William M. Molinari, a former councilman, said he hopes the council will vote to repeal the ordinances.

“I’m confident that if it goes on the ballot it would be defeated overwhelmingly,” Molinari said. “We’re prepared to respond with a very vigorous campaign if that’s what they want to do.”

On Dec. 27, SMART turned in about 3,800 signatures each for the two petition drives, aimed at repealing the two ordinances. To qualify the measures for the ballot, SMART needed to gather only 2,263 valid signatures--10% of the city’s registered voters.

The county registrar-recorder’s office determined that the measures qualified after checking 3,000 signatures for each measure, said Assistant City Administrator Richard Torres. About 80% of the signatures were valid, he said.

Three council members who voted to give the Redevelopment Agency condemnation powers showed some wavering during interviews. Council members Arnold M. Glasman, Kathy Salazar and Art Payan approved the ordinances on Nov. 28.

Abstained From Voting

Councilman William Nighswonger abstained from voting because he is an officer in a real estate company that does business in the redevelopment areas. The fifth councilman, Edward C. Pizzorno, opposes the ordinances.

Payan said he will not rule out a vote to repeal the ordinances until he assesses community support for the council decision and the expense of holding an election. A special election could cost up to $20,000, Torres said.

“I really haven’t decided,” Payan said. “If it became a ballot measure, I would do whatever I could to get the facts out to the citizens to consider.”

Glasman said he might consider voting to repeal the ordinances. “I have to sit down and re-analyze it,” Glasman said.

Salazar said she wants Montebello voters to decide the issue. “I feel very strongly,” the councilwoman said. “If I’m repealing it, I’m telling Montebello to take a step backwards in time.”

The ordinances were to have taken effect 30 days after approval, but they were suspended as a result of the referendum campaign.

The ordinances would give the city’s Redevelopment Agency the power of eminent domain in two redevelopment zones in South Montebello:

The South Montebello Industrial Redevelopment Project area covers 287 acres south of Washington Boulevard.

The Montebello Economic Revitalization Project area starts south of Washington Boulevard and stretches north past the Whittier Boulevard commercial district. It contains 332 acres.

The areas are mostly industrial, but include a sprinkling of commercial and residential properties. Owner-occupied, single-family homes would be exempt from eminent domain under the ordinances.

City officials contend they need eminent domain to be able to quickly assemble parcels of land to attract new industrial and commercial development to South Montebello. That would bring the city more jobs and tax dollars to pay for government expenses, including police and fire protection. Under state law, the Redevelopment Agency must pay fair market value for any property it acquires by eminent domain.

SMART members have complained that use of eminent domain would accelerate development and bring more traffic, noise and air pollution into their neighborhoods.

They have joined in a coalition with South Montebello businessmen to oppose the use of eminent domain. The coalition, called Montebello Cares, recently filed suit accusing city officials of approving environmental impact reports that greatly understate the traffic, pollution and noise that would result if eminent domain were used. The Superior Court lawsuit is pending.