Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-City Administrator I CITY OF SAN BEROARDINO - REQUES,<)OR COUNCIL ACTION From: Fred Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator City Administrator Subject: Appeal of John Lonergan relative to Central City Parking Place Commission to discontinue practice of recommending parking leases in Downtown Lots 1, 2 and 3. 0Ipt: Oeu: March 23, 1989 ~ Synopsis of Previous Council ection: April 18, 1988 - Resolution No. 88-112 approved authorizing the execution of a parking agreement with John Lonergan for 14 parking spaces. March 20, 1988 - Appeal hearing set for April 3, 1988 at 10:00 a.m. Recommended motion: II ::0 "' (") ; l:i . I N .. (.,.) Q :II: :I. % W Q .., &:- :'1. &:- That the appeal of John Lonergan relative to the Central City Parking Place Commission decision to discontinue the practice of recommending parking leases in Downtown lots 1, 2 and 3 be denied. ContICt person: Pr..d Wi 1 Ann Phone: 5122 Supporting dm lItt8Ched: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: .Yes Werd: 1 Amount: Souree: (Acct. No.1 (Acct. Descriotion) Finenee: Council Notes: lLa , . CITY, OF, SAN BERN,OADINO - REQUEST f3>>R COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT John Lonergan is appealing the decision of the Central City Parking Place Commission to discontinue the practice of recommending parking leases in Downtown Lots 1, 2 and 3. Mr. Lonergan indicated that the continuation of the parking lease policy is necessary in order to ensure that the parking needs of the tenants in this building will continue to be met in the future. In December 1986, the Parking Commission adopted a policy quideline for the leasing of parking spaces in district lots 1, 2 and 3. This policy allowed parking spaces to be leased to businesses located in the district up to a maximum of 50% of the available parking spaces. Under this policy guideline, a total of 3 leases were executed including Mr. Lonergan's lease for 14 spaces. In December 1988, a Main street Parking Task Force was established to consider the issue of downtown parking. The Task Force developed a number of recommendations for improving the parking situation. These recommendations were ultimately adopted by the Parking Commission. One of the recommendations of the Task Force was to revise the leasing policy. Since the parking lots were operating at full capacity, it was felt by members of the Task Force that the continued leasing of public parking spaces to private business did not promote effective utilization of the available parking. The other concern was that all property owners in the parking district were currently paying a proportionate share of the operational costs through the annual assessment process and, as such, it was not equitable to reserve this public parking for a single property owner's use. An alternate solution which was recommended by the Main Street Parking Task Force was to implement a parking permit system. Mr. Lonergan's existing lease is for a 60-month period which began on April 27, 1988. An option exists in the agreement which authorizes the City Administrator to grant a maximum 60 month extension to this agreement. 75-0264 o o It should also noted that the current lease may be terminated without cause upon 30-day written calendar notice from either party. Based on these factors, it is recommended that the appeal of John Lonergan be denied. D . WILSON Assistant to the City Administrator FAW/sh o o JOHN BARTOW LONERGAN 1103 BEL-AIR PLACE LOS ANGELES, CAUFORNIA 90077 REe'D.-ADMlH. Off. 1989 MAR 14 t.M 9: 52 \ March 10, 1989 The Mayor and Members of the City Council City of San Bernardino City Hall, 300 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Ladies and Gentlemen: This is a request that I be allowed to make a statement to you at your meeting scheduled for the morning of April 3, 1989. For myself and my co-trustee I am appealing to you from the actions of the City's Central Parking Commission in ending the practice of executing unlimited time parking space lease agreements as to spaces in Public Lots 1, 2 and 3. I first received word of the Commission action through a letter dated December 14, 1988 from the City Administrator's office. The letter informed me (1) that at a meeting on September 1, 1988 the Commission had decided to discontinue the space leasing practice for the three lots, (2) that exist- ing leases would not be extended, and (3) that parking credits in the three lots would be eliminated. My appeal to the Com- mission for reconsideration was unsuccessful, hence this ap- peal to you. I think the elimination of parking credits for leased spaces is proper. I had not fully realized that credits were being allowed. Past practice has been for the Council to authorize the execution of so-called Parking Agreements with property owners who needed unlimited time parking use of a given number of spaces in certain of the open lots throughout the City and in the five-level structure. The space leases were made because of the real and practical need of the business, financial and propessiona'1 people with offices in the central and other business areas for reserved unlimited time parking to which they could have an assured right of return th~oughout business days whenever they had to use their cars for less than the remainder of the day, and for which privilege they were will- ing to pay. This appeal is made necessary because of my own particu- lar problem. However, the issue applies, and the reasoning shOUld be considered as applying, to all public parking facili- ties of the City. , . . o o Mayor and Council March 10, 1989 Page 2 I applied for and 'obtained the lease of spaces because my tenants demanded more unlimited time parking than I could provide by my private gated lot. This was particularly true as to the hard working account executives of Dean Witter Rey- nolds Inc., my ground floor tenant, and the business lawyers of the firm of Parker, Stanbury, McGee, Babcock & Combs, the third floor lessee. All these people and others of tenants find it absolutely necessary to hurriedly use their cars frequently during busi- ness days. I allocated the spaces leased to the demanding parties. ! had already spent an almost unconscionable amount in acquiring the land devoted to my private lot, and had even tried to buy additional land from the City for parking. I did everything I could to provide tenants with controlled parking before obtaining the lease agreement from the City. The action of the Commission of which I am complaining is a real and damaging mistake which shoUld be corrected. Here are some of the reasons: 1. The action was taken without public notice and an opportunity to be heard given affected property owners and others of the public. 2. Leasing is a practice other cities have found to be practical and virtually required for development of their bubiness districts. 3. Since it applies only to three of the public parking facilities, it discriminates in favor of other properties in the downtown area. As a matter of fact, there is a basic discrimination which cannot be justified and which, I believe, violates the mandates of the United States Constitution as to equal treatment. 4. AcCording to the letter of December 14th, the action was taken on the recommendation of a group called the Main Street Parking Task Force. I am told there were just three persons in the unit, which seems to be part or and sponsored by the Main Street Project. They did not give notice to those who would be affected or afford them an opportunity to be heard. (One wonders just which group of people is running the City of San Bernardino.) 5. The current allocation of spaces between the various time limits (one hour, two hours and unlimited time) in Lots 1, 2 and 3 should have been studied first and publiC com- ment allowed. The problem is greater than that, however. - . . o o Mayor and Cocncil March 10, 1989 Page 3 I will be present at your meeting set for April 3rd, and at that time will disclose to you the facts in support of the assertion of discrimination set out in the paragraph numbered 3 on the preceding page. C;Z;I&~ aLe ( If!:f~. LOnerga~s Trustee of Lonergan Tru~tI~o. 2 . ~~. , o o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RESOLUTION NO. 88-112 SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE JOHN B. LONERGAN RELATING TO DOWNTOvm PARKING DIStRICT LOT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE LEASE OF PARKING SPACES IN #3. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CO~Y.ON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf on said City an Agreement with John B. Lonergan relating to the lease of parking spaces in downtown parking district lot #3, which Agreement is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by reference as fully as though set forth at length. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a reaular meeting thereof, held the 18th day of Anril , 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Estrada. Reillv. Flores. Maudslev. Minor. Pone-Ludlam. Miller NAYS: None ABSENT: None ~(,~ . y lerK /9cL The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 27 day of , 1988. April 28 4-11-88 RESOLUTION""" THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDI,", AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION Ol-'AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN B.~NERGAN RELATING TO THE LEASE OF PARKING SPACES IN DOWNTOWN PARKING DISTRICT LOT *3. j2 /! ./'11"'/ f: :-' .) t ~ .~ f2-'-'-Ly...... f,'/ I.A-~ry Evl n wi cox, Mayor City of San Bernardino Approved as to form and legal content: ..j~ 4/11/88 o o PARKING AGREEMENT (Downtown Parking District Lot #3) THIS PARKING AGREEMENT (referred to as "Agreement") is . entered into between the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a municipal corporation, referred to as "City", and John B. Lonergan, as Trustee of the John B. Lonergan Trust No. 2 (referred to as "Lessee"). City and Lessee agree as follows: 1. Recitals. A. Lessee is the owner of commercial real property in the City of.San Bernardino, located at 398 West Fourth Street. B. Lessee has requested the designation of Fourteen (14) spaces in Parking District Lot #3 for use by employees, tenants and invitees of the owner. C. The Parking Place Commission has determined that the designation of such spaces for use by Lessee is in conformance with its pre-established policy for leasing of parking spaces within the Downtown Parking Place District. 2. Incorporation of Parking Commission Policy. A. At its regular meeting of December 4, 1986, the Central City Parking Place Commission adopted POlicy Guidelines for the leasing of parking space in Parking District Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. That policy is as follows: . - 1 - JFW:ss 4-11-88 . . . JFw:ss o o "GENERAL" 1. Parking spaces of District Lots 1, 2, 3 & 4 can only be leased to businesses located within the District, providing that all special assessment and business fees for such business is kept current. 2. The total number of parking spaces leased in each of the District lots shall not exceed 50% of the over-all number of parking spaces provided in each lot. 3. All future leases shall be based on the prevailing rates as established by the Public Buildings Division. The location of any leased parking ~aces is subject to possible future relocation within the same lot. 4. All lease requests and applications shall be reviewed by the Central City Parking Place Commission. PRIORITY: No. 1 - All business establishments located adjacent to the District lot. No. 2 - All business establishments located within approximately 600 feet walking distance from the District lot. - 2 - . . o o No. 3 - All business establishments located in the District. That policy is hereby incorporated herein as a term and condition of this lease. 3. Allocation of Spaces. City agrees to assign and allocate Fourteen (14) spaces located in Parking Lot i3 for use by officers, employees, tenants and invitees at 398 West Fourth Street, San Bernardino. The designated spaces are illustrated on Exhibit "I" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 4. Consideration. Lessee shall pay to City the sum of $22.34 per month per space, payable semi-annually, in advance. This sum shall be adjusted annually based on changes in the Los Angeles/Long Beach consumer price index, provided said adjustment shall be limited to a maximum of ten percent (10%) annually. Upon acceptance of this Agreement, Lessee shall deposit with City the amount of $1,876.56, which will be held by City as a performance bond. City agrees to apply the performance bond funds toward the first semi- annual payment, less cost of $490 for signing. "5. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be 60 months, commencing upon the effective date of this Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 7, unless earlier terminated by either party as provided herein. The City Administrator of the City is hereby authorized to grant a maximum 60 months extension of this - 3 - JFW:ss . o o agreement, upon written request for same from the Lessee. The extension shall be upon such terms as shall then be mutually agreed upon by the parties. 6. Termination. This lease may be terminated without cause upon thirty (30) calendar days' advanced written notice from either party, mailed to the address indicated for the receipt of notices. Lessee may at any time, but only upon a similar thirty (30) calendar days' notice in advance, terminate the lease as to any particular space(s) held under this lease, and upon each such termination the total monthly rental shall be accordingly reduced without further notice or agreement of the parties. 7. Effective Date of Agreement. This Agreement shall become effective upon date of execution hereof. 8. Maintenance and Security. City shall provide maintenance and general security at the same times and in the same manner as with all other parking areas owned by City and in the same general geographic area. City shall keep the common areas striped, lighted, and clear and free of rubbish and obstructions of any nature. Lessee shall have responsibility for security of the specific spaces leased. City shall not be responsible for removal of unlawfully parked vehicles or for the security of automobiles parked in leased space. 9. Possessory Interest. The City and the Lessee hereby agree and understand - 4 - , . o o that this Agreement may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that if such possessory interest is created, the Lessee shall pay the property taxes, if any, levied on such possessory interest. The Lessee shall promptly provide to the City upon such payment a written certification, signed by an authorized agent of the Lessee, that all such taxes due, if any, have been paid by the Lessee. 10. Terms Subject to Lease Agreement. This Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions of any provisions contained in any indenture related to bonds issued for the purchase or expansion of Parking District Lot #3. The parties recognize that City's right to occupy the subject premises, or to commit the premises to the uses specified in this Agreement, may expire before this Agreement expires by its terms. In such event, this Agreement shall terminate as of such date as City's entitlement to use and control of the lot expires. 11. Hold Harmless. Lessee agrees to, and shall, hold City, its elective and appointive boards, commission, officers, agents and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from Lessee's operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by Lessee, its officers, employees, tenants or invitees, or by any one or more persons directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for Lessee. Lessee agrees to and shall defend City and its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents - 5 - JFW:ss 4-11-88 o o and employees frOm any suits or actions at law or in equity for damages caused, or alleged to have been caused, by reason of any of the operations hereunder. 12. Liability Insurance. Lessee agrees to procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement and any extension thereof, at its expense, public liability insurance adequate to protect against liability for damage claims through public use of or arising out of accidents occurring in or around said parking spaces, in a minimum amount of $1,000,000 for injuries in anyone accident, and $100,000 for property damage. Such insurance policies shall provide coverage for City's contingent liability on such claims or losses. City shall be named as an additional insured. A certificate of insurance shall be delivered to City's Risk Management Division. Lessee agrees to obtain a written obligation from the insurers to notify City in writing at least 30 days prior to cancellation or refusal to renew any such policies. 13. Assignment. This Agreement shall constitute a revocable license and does not constitute an easement or covenant running with the land. Lessee shall not assign any parking spaces which are the subject of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City. The parties contemplate that the parking spaces will be devoted to occupants of Lessee's building and customers, - 6 - JFW:ss 4-11-88 , o o business invitees and employees thereof. Any other use shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement. This Agreement automatically terminates upon any sale or any transfer of more than 50% ownership in"the building at 398 West Fourth Street. 14. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by both parties. Failure on the part of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a continuous waiver of the right to compel enforcement of such provision or provisions, nor shall such waiver be construed as a release of any surety from its obligations under this Agreement. 15. Notices. All notices herein required shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: City Lessee City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 John B. Lonergan, as Trustee of the John B. Lonergan Trust No. 2 1103 Bel Air Place Los Angeles, CA 90077 16. Validity. If any terms, condition,provision, or covenant of this Agreement shall to any extent be judged invalid, unenforceable, void or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a Court of - 7 - JFW:ss 4-11-88 o o competent jurisdiction, each and all remaining terms, conditions, promises and covenants of this Agreement shal,l not be affected and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 17. Entire Agreement. There are no understandings or agreements except herein expressly stated. Any modifications must be in writing. DATED: ~.;2N II?/' ATTEST: *,//.'4/~~ Ci-ey C erk ~(i >;#tt~{ Jo B. onergan,. as Trustee of the John B. Lonergan Trust No. 2 Approved as to form an legal content: - 8- / VO#-TiCcJ;) J !-(;., king Dlstncf 0 PvKlno Lot na 3 . .... I -~ - .j '" Str;et - , t- . I . . - - - . . I ~'I ~ 1i ~ ~ 1 ~ It _~ tJN" I~ 1"/I1JIf~~" "'At' .t.I' 1iII1I4I1I,lifT ~ I",,, ." ;llWCYCAPPeD 2 TMEI../Mtr 57 (~..) III' "".."'" I' , , o o STATEMENT BY JOHN B. LONERGAN TO THE SAN BERNARDINO CITY COUNCIL AT THE REGULAR MEET- ING OF THE COUNCIL ON APRIL 3, 1989 AS A TRUSTEE OF A PRIVATE TRUST I AM THE OWNER OF THE THREE STORY LONERGAN OFFICE BUILDING AND ITS ENCLOSED GATED PARKING LOT AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOURTH AND D STREETS. THE BUILDING ADJOINS PUBLIC PARKING LOT NO. 3 AND IS SOMETIMES CALLED THE DEAN WITTER BUILD- ING BECAUSE OF THAT FIRM'S NAME ON THE MARQUEE. I AM APPEALING TO YOU, THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CITY, BECAUSE YOUR CENTRAL CITY PARKING COMMISSION HAS TAKEN A SERIOUS AND ECONOMICALLY DAMAGING ACTION IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC PARKING LOTS 1, 2 AND 3. THAT ACTION WAS THE ADOPTION ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1988 OF A POLICY WHICH DECLARED THAT EXISTING UNLIMITED TIME RESTRICTED USE CITY LEASES OF PARKING SPACES IN THESE THREE LOTS WOULD NOT BE RENEWED OR EXTENDED, AND THAT THE PRACTICE OF LEASING OUT OF SPACES TO PRIVATE PARTIES WAS ENDED. /~ o o LIKE A NUMBER OF OTHERS, I LEASE FROM THE CITY SOME OPEN AIR PARKING SPACES TO SUPPLEMENT MY PRIVATELY OWNED PARKING. THE PRIVATE SPACES PLUS THE LEASED ONES CURRENTLY SATISFY THE NEEDS - I SHOULD SAY THE DEMANDS - OF MY TEN- ANTS. IF I CAN'T LEASE SPACES FROM THE CITY I WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE TROUBLE WITH SOME TENAN'1'S. THE COMMISSION ACTED LAST SEPTEMBER AND IN THIS YEAR I WAS UNSUCCESSFUL ON MY APPEAL FOR RECON- SIDERATION. I DO NOT KNOW WHeTHER YOU, THE COUNCIL, HAVE COKSIDERED OR EVEN KNOW OF THE ISSUE. IF YOU SHOULD NOW SUSTAIN AND APPROVE OF THE PARKING COMMISSION'S RECENT ACTIONS, I BELIEVE THERE WILL HAVE BEEN CREATED A REMARKABLE EXAMPLE OF WHAT SHOULD BE TERMED AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL WITHDRAWAL AND WI'I'HHOLDING OF THE "ROUGH EQUALITY" IN TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW WHICH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITU'I'ION GUARANTEES. NONE OF YOU WERE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WHEN, ABOUT SIXTEEN YEARS AGO IN 1973 THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME AND ITS SEPARATE RDA BOARD TOOK TWO WELL-INTENDED BUT FAR TOO GENEROUS ACTIONS AS TO PARKING THAT VERY SERIOUSLY AND ADVERSELY THEN AFFECTED AND NOW AFFECT OFFICE BUILDING DEVELOPMF;NT o o IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. AS FAR AS I CAN DETERMINE, ALL THOSE ACTIONS WE'RE PERFECTLY LAWFUL. BOB HOLCOMB wAS MAYOR IN 1973. HOWEVER, I AM INFORMED THAT HE DID NOT APPBOVE OF AND ACTUALLY OPPOSED THE ACTIONS. THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT HE WAS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED BY THE 1973 COUNCIL'S RESOLUTION TO EXECUTE THE EASEMENT GRANT I WILL DESCRIBE. TO BEGIN WITH, WE PRIVATE OFFICE BUILDING OWNERS AND LESSEES CANNOT TAKE SITES FOR PARKING BY COURT PROCEEDINGS. WE DO THE BEST WE CAN, AND COMING UP SHORT OF THE REQUIRED SPACES, WE HAVE ASKED THE CITY TO RECOGNIZE OUR NEED FO~ SOME RESTRICTED UNLIMITED TIME SPACES FOR RESERVED USE BY TENANTS. WE HAVE BEEN WILLING TO PAY AND HAVE PAID REASONABLE ~ENTALS FOR THE PRIVILEGE. SUCH LEASING PRACTICE IS USED AND WORKS IN OTHER CITIES. THIS IS THE TIME TO CORRECT THE COMMISSION'S ACTIONS. WE CAN'T WAIT UN~IL OUR LEASES ARE TERMINATED. TENANTS WILL NOT WAIT FOR THE END o o OF THEIR LEASE TERM BEFORE DECIDING TO AND ACTUALLY BEGINNING TO LOOK AROUND FOR OTHER ACCOMODATIONS ~HICH WILL SATISFY THEIR REQUIRE- MENTS. IF THE AUTO PARKING IS NOT WORKING OUT OR BECOMES INSUFFICIENT, FOR INSTANCE, A TENANT WILL LOOK YEARS AHEAD, SEE THE END OF THE OFFICE SPACE LEASE TERM AND RIGHT NOW WILL BEGIN TO SHOP. A BUILDING OWNER OR ITS TENANT SIMPLY CANNOT WAIT FOR THE INEVITABLE BEFORE MOVING TO AVOID OR MODERATE IT. A MOMENT AGO I SPOKE OF WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL WITHHOLDING OF THE ROUGH EQUALITY IN TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW WHICH WILL BE THE CERTAIN RESULT OF THE COMMISSION ACTIONS. I DID NOT DISCOVER THE FACTS WHICH I WILL RELATE TO YOU UNTIL EARLY THIS YEAR. WHEN I UNEARTHED THOSE FACTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMISSION ACTIONS, I CONFESS I FOUND THE FACTS UPSETTING. THE LONERGAN BUILDING WAS BUILT IN THE MID-SIXTIES. IN JANUARY OF 1973 THE CITY'S RDA "ALLOCATED" TO THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND ON WHICH THE BUILDING NOW KNOWN AS PACIFIC SAVINGS PLAZA WAS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT, 125 FREE PARKING SPACES IN THE CITY'S FIVE- LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE. THE GRANT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY. TIlIi IlYIl>8I111iO Hl ILb'.' OWtfl:.u -BY A-LQ5 '-8fl.ii:S ~ VEHTIlIl- CiOnP. T All "96LD. CONSTRUCTION WAS TO / /7 C BE THEREBY ENCOURAGED. o o FOR THE RECORD I ADD AT THIS POINT THAT MR. E. GEORGE WEBSTER, A VERY ETHICAL PERSON WHO WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE RDA BOARD AT THAT TIME AND WHO WAS AN OFFICER OF THE CORPORATE OWNt~SHIP OF THE PROPERTY, DISQUALIFIED HIMSELF AND DID NOT IN ANY WAY PARTICIPATE IN THE PRESENTATION OR CONSIDERATION OR ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE PARKING TRANSACTION. WHILE THE PARKlNG GRANT TO THE PLAZA BUILDING WAS PERFECTLY LAWFUL, AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND FOLLOWED A PATTERN USED IN OTHER RDA'S AND CITIES, MY COMPLAINT ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES REQUIRES CONSIDERATION OF SOME FACTS NOT IM- MEDIATELY APPARENT. USING THE RENTAL CURRENTLY CHARGED THE LONERGAN BUILDING AND OTHERS BY THE CITY FOR EACH LEASED OPEN AIR PARKING SPACE, THE SAME BEING PAYABLE IN ADVANCE EVERY SIX MONTHS, THE VALUE OF THE COST~FREE GRANT FROM ITS INCEPTION TO THE PRESENT AMOUNTS TO ABOUT $ 541,745.00, NOT CONSIDERING THE ACCRUAL OF ANY INTEREST ON THE FUNDS SAVED TO THE GRANTEE AND THEREFORE AVAILABLE TO IT F'OR PROFITABLE USE. THE,BUILDING INQIilESTIONIS LESS THAN A FULL CITY BLOCK FROM THE LONERGAN BUILDING AND IS ONE OF ITS COMPETITORS. THE GRANT WAS DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE THE PLAZA BUILDING TO BE BUILT. o o THEN IN MAY OF 1973 THE CITY AND ITS RDA, AGAIN FOR THE STATED PURPOSE OF ENCOURAGING CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING, SIMILARLY GRANTED A FIRM FIFTY YEAR, I REPEAT, FIFTY YEAR FREE PARKING EASEMENT IN THE FIVE-LEVEL STRUCTURE TO VANIR TOWER COMPANY, A PARTNERSHIP OF WHICH H. FRANK DOMINGUEZ WAS THE NAMED GENERAL PARTNER. THE GRANT WAS FOR 325 SPACES, AGAIN I REPEAT, 325 SPACES, POSITIONED IN AREAS OF THE STRUCTURE GENERALLY DESCRIBABLE AS ADJOINING THE PROPERTY ALREADY OWNED BY VANIR PARTNERSHIP AND ON WHICH VANIR TOWER BUILDING IS NOW LOCATED. ALSO, IN THE EASEMENT GRANT, WHICH WAS SIGNED BY BOTH CITY AND RDA, CITY OBLIGATED ITSELF TO MAINTAIN, KEEP IN REPAIR AND STRIPE THE SPACES, AND TO PROVIDE PERSONAL INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE INSURANCE IN SPECIFIED LIMITS WITH THE PARTNERSHIP AS A NAMED INSURED. THE VANIR BUILDING IS JUST ABOUT THE DISTANCE OF A FULL CITY BLOCK FROM THE LONERGAN BUILDING. AS I SAID, I AM RELIABLY INFORMED THAT MR. HOLCOMB, THE MAYOR AT THE TIME OF THE GRANT, OPPOSED THE ACTION. HOWEVER, ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS APPARENTLY VOTED APPROVAL. o o USING THE RENTAL CURRENTLY CHARGED BY THE CITY FOR OPEN AIR SPACE RENTALS, WHICH IS $22.34 PER SPACE, PAYABLE EVERY SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE, THE PARKING EXPENSE SAVING VALUE AND EFFECT TO VANIR OF THE GRANTED EASEMENT, FROM ITS STATED EFFECTIVE DATE TO THIS TIME - ALMOST SIXTEEN YEARS - COMPUTES TO ABOUT $1,379,000.00 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE INTEREST WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN EARNED ON THE SAVING OR ANY COMPOUNDING OF INTERES'I. AT THE CURRENT RENTAL RATE FOR THE PERIOD OF ALMOST SIXTEEN YEAFS, ASSUMING THE RENTAL ON 325 SPACES HAD BEEN PAYABLE IN ADVANCE EVEFY SIX MONTHS AS IN THE OPEN SPACE LEASES INCLUDING MINE, AND WITH AN INTEREST COMPUTA- TION OF TEN PEF CENT PER ANNUM, COMPOUNDED IN PROPER MANNER, THE DOLLARS SAVED TO THE HOLDER OF THE VANIR GRANT SHOULD COMPUTE TO A50UT $3,266,000.00. NOW LET US LOOK AT THE WHOLE PRACTICAL PICTURE. FOR FIFTY YEARS, THE ABSOLUTE TERM OF THE FREE EASEMENT GRANT, THE DOLLAR TOTAL INCLUDING THE INTEREST COMPOUNDED PROPERLY IS AT LEAST . $113,700,0~0.00! THAT WAS QUITE A BENEFIT FOR THE CITY TO GRANT TO AN ONCOMING COMPETITOR OF MY BUILDING AND OTHERS LIKE IT IN THE DOWNTOWN. o o AND NOW YOUR PARKING COMMISSION TELLS ME AND OTHERS THAT WE CAN'T EVEN LEASE AT ANY FIGURE THE OPEN AIR SPACES WE NERD TO COMPETE OR OPERATE! I, 'AM NOT, ASKING FORA GIVEAWAy PROGRAM,. WE OFFICE BUILDING OWNERS WHO LEASE FROM THE CITY ARE PAYING THE RENTAL SET BY THE CITY. OFFICE SPACE I,EASING IN THE DOWNTOWN IS DONE IN A COMPETITIVE MARKET. WE RISKED MONEY, CREDIT AND PROPERTY TO PROVIDE RENTABLE OFFICE ACCOM- ODATIOKS FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AND BUSINESSES OTHER THAN RETAIL STORES AND SERVICES. CITY PARKING LOTS PROVIDE ONE AND TWO HOUR PARKING FREE TO CUSTOMERS OF RETAIL BUSINESSES AND TO CLIENTS OF OUR TENANTS. HOWEVER, WHAT OFFICE SPACE LESSORS AND THEIR TENANTS NEED IS RESTRICTED AND UNLIMITED TIME ~PACES FOR HARD WORKING INDIVIDUALS WHO NECESSARILY MOVE IN AND OUT THROUGHOUT THE DAY. THAT FACILITY IS NOT PROVIDED BY OPEN, UNLIMITED TIME SPACES IN PUBLIC LOTS, FOR THEY ARE QUICKLY LOST DURING A NORMAL ACTIVE BUSINESS DAY. AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF BOTH CITY AND ITS RDA, YOU SHOULD ACT NOW. IF YOU ENGOURAGED AND CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE VANIR AND THE OTHER BUILD- ING WITH FREE AND MAINTAINED SPACES, WHY CAN'T o o YOU FIRMLY ESTABLISH THE POLICY AND PROMISE OF THIS CITY ~O ACCORD TO OTHERS OF US, BOTH PRESENT AND PROSPECTIVE OWNERS AND DOWNTOWN LESSEES, SOMETHING APPROACHING WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS TERMED "ROUGH EQUALITY OF TR!ATMENT" - FOR THE PRESENT AND FOR THE FUTURE? AND THOSE REASONABLE RENTAL AMOUN1'S WILL HELP TO BUILD UP THE BALANCES IN THE PARKING FUND, TO BE SURE. JUST DON'T BE SO ROUGH ON US!