HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-27-2021_ Study Session - Agenda Item No. 1_Flores, Christian_sanitizedFrom:Christian Flores
To:Public Comments
Subject:Carousel Mall Redevelopment
Date:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 5:17:54 PM
Caution - This email originated from outside the City - Verify that the Email display name and Email address are consistent. - Use caution when opening attachments.
My name is Christian Flores and I am an active voter, community organizer in San
Bernardino, regarding the pending proposals for what the redevelopment of our downtown
Carousel Mall:
The idea of a waterway does not make sense. Where would said water come from and how
much would it cost, especially considering the drought we are liable to experience in our
region. If it comes out of our taxes then that is too much of a liability. Our definition of "bold"
is definitely different. To me a bold decision would mean investing into the electrification of
the downtown area and pushing the limits of what our natural resources can sustain. This is the
kind of idea that genuinely makes me question the validity of community input in the matter.
If the secret sauce to the Crowdsourced Placemaking was to get input from Day 1, when was
Day 1 and who did they reach out to? If anything I would have preferred a public forum styled
interface for input akin to the CPUC's where community members have a digital space to
bounce ideas off each other in an organic fashion. In fact even as a resident I would have
expected a survey for my input on what the project should be, and the type of community
benefits agreement we would want alongside it. If there is a CBA in name that does not stem
from the Community's needs it is not a CBA. Something the community and the state need is
Housing, and how is the housing piece going to pan out for our residents. Even in the midst of
COVID with our unhoused numbers growing at a rate our shelters can not contain, our city
rejected Project Homekey for a Hotel on Hospitality. We have a need for over 2500 low and
very low income houses. At a rate of $1300+ a month our $1800-2,875 a month income
community will be paying over 30% of their income and be housing impoverished. Is this
housing truly being built for our existing community, or the communities that you want to be
here. communities that are being priced out of LA/OC but can afford to swing that rent
payment for a 740sq ft. apartment. Even public servants and SB City Employees wouldn't be
able to afford that. Our Median Income is $47,840/year (3,596/month) meaning 30% of rent
would be $1,079, meaning our jobs would have to pay $23/hr to keep us above the 30%
income on rent threshold. Our lowest paid full time employees at 14/hr making 2,430/month
exceed 30% at $730/month on rent, meaning they would need to make double to afford the
lowest rental rate. This "public-private partnership sounds more like using public money for
private profit. The proposals state the rates as being determined by market demand, but what
about our community's demands? As things are, we are being priced out, without our input.
Over the years there have been smaller public spaces and forums for community input as to
projects on this property, but there has not been a city wide effort for input, if there were these
proposals would either look different. Also the palm trees are invasive and annoying, replace
them with fruit trees and berry bushes. Green Spaces, Sustainable Energy Infrastructure, and
Affordable Housing for our Community are the boldness we need, and we demand. .
~Christian Flores SBGN