Dear Editor,
Dear Editor,
I am a long-time Cypress resident and have lived here much longer than most and well before Measure D. I am a person that was strongly opposed to Measure L that changed the zoning of property on Katella Avenue to allow a proposed ProLogis warehouse distribution trucking facility in Cypress.
I’m now vehemently against Measure A, a second City of Cypress measure to allow development on property adjacent to Cerritos Avenue. It is earmarked for single-family homes with other potential uses. What that exactly is remains somewhat of a mystery. In fact, pass measure A and you will find out. Just like with Measure L, it will be a surprise. We need no more surprises from city hall. Vote no on Measure A.
Let’s introduce some facts. Last year we were misled about Measure L promoting a senior citizen facility as well as medical and office space. In my personal case, the circulator knocked on my door, and I was able to see just a few of the one hundred pages of Measure L. The lady only mentioned senior citizen housing. Certainly there was no mention of a warehouse distribution truck facility. Oh, I forgot, the senior citizen housing project fell apart, and a trucking facility was put in its place. It was a bait and switch. Put on your crash helmets, it is about to happen again.
Another point to be made. Measure A is packed with legal speak. The average person cannot understand what much of it means without an attorney. I got my legal team and they went through all 160 or so pages of it. I had a headache afterwards.
In affect, if Measure A passes it will allow a variety of developments on the property on Katella Avenue, not just single-family homes. Actually in the writing of the Measure it contains wording to allow for much more, and it does not include significant par or open space. A little tiny park like Willow Park does not count. It has to be bigger than that.
Recently the City of Cypress cut a deal for deed restrictions for a portion of the Measure A property to limit what can go on the property, in addition to the single-family homes. That’s what they say. OK. Yes, the deed restrictions are legal and binding. Here’s the problem. The deed restrictions are actually inconsistent with Measure A. They actually restrict parts of Measure A.
I want honest, transparent, responsible development in Cypress, but I have reservations with the honesty, relationships, and back room deals taking place in this city. I have problems with the projects being proposed. I think there could be a good mix with some real park space, some housing and some nice small retail. We have to compromise a bit. I know the city needs revenue. I agree. However, I don’t want mass development and do not like the dishonesty. Not knowing the exact details of this project, just like in Measure L, makes me nervous.
David DePoy
Cypress
Why I’m voting yes on A
I moved to Cypress in 1973 when it was mostly strawberry fields and farms so I know about the loss of open space.
I live across the street from the Los Alamitos Business Park with trucks coming and going all day and night so I know about trucks.
I voted no on measure “L” because I lived through the Shaw Carpet fiasco as my parents live very close to Shaw. I saw the ambiguous wording in Measure L and voted no. The measure passed and we were left with ProLogis as the landowners, and the fight was on.
After our neighbors in Los Alamitos made us aware of the fraud that was perpetrated against the voters of Cypress with Measure L, I joined in the fight with the CFRD. I walked the street of Cypress passing out no on A flyers because it had the same ambiguous wording as Measure L. Steve Mauss and George Pardon worked tirelessly with the landowners and the city to work out the deed restrictions that have been found to be enforceable by three different land attorneys. I am now confidant that passing measure A is the right thing for my family because if there are houses on that land near my home it can never be a warehouse with more trucks. I think it gives us a better chance to beat ProLogis with more homes near their site. I’m not worried about the homes near the stables because I don’t think the stables will be there by the time the houses along the back of the project are occupied and selling the homes does not concern me, having them built does.
As I have trucks driving by my house all day and night I am not willing to have any more trucks. For that reason I will continue to fight the ProLogis project with everything I have. I have friends that live in Carrier Row and I owe it to them and my family to continue the fight.
So to recap, I voted no on Measure L and I’m voting yes on Measure A. I encourage all Cypress residents to do the same.
Douglas Nobles
Cypress
Bailey is not negotiating in good faith
As I sat listening to Cypress City Council Member Bailey rant about Los Alamitos residents seemingly endless demands on Cypress to keep their open space I had to wonder what was so bad about open space that had Council Member Bailey foaming at the mouth and beating up his city’s neighbors who were expressing an opinion that they have held for many years; an opinion that was held by Cypress residents when they fought developer interests in 1987 and passed Measure D, to keep Cypress’ open space.
Los Alamitos knows how important parks are. The City of Los Alamitos purchased Laurel Park from the LAUSD. It was a cost that the city was willing to do, because the community supported it and wanted the higher quality of life that open space provides.
Council Member Bailey, seemingly unaware of Cypress’ past love of open spaces, charged that Los Alamitos should work to BRAC the JFTB and build our park there, and just leave them alone. I guess when you are carrying water for the developer who financed the start of your political career it helps to try to divert attention from facts by pure flights of fancy. If Cypress Council Member Bailey were to have just asked his city attorney why Los Alamitos residents thought there was going to be a park on 24 acres of the LART near Cottonwood he might have found out that in 2004 there was a part of a legal contract that actually called for the cities of Cypress and Los Alamitos to work in good faith to create such a park. Why ask the city attorney? Because his signature is at the bottom of the legal document.
Bailey’s grandstanding notwithstanding, the Cottonwood Agreement that was negotiated between Cypress, Los Alamitos and Cottonwood Church clearly stipulates the desires of the parties to develop a location near the Cottonwood Church property that would be turned into a 24 acre community park with both Cypress and Los Alamitos working together “in good faith” to make it happen. Unlike Cypress, Los Alamitos had a citizens group actively involved in the negotiations led by Mayor Jempsa and Council Member Freeman.
During the negotiations Cypress was adamant that the park not be located on the Katella frontage. They insisted that the park be located at the corner of Lexington and Cerritos, closest to their residential community. No one on the Los Alamitos side, either city government or community activists, had any disagreement with the location we just wanted the open space retained for the benefit of both communities.
Nine years ago in negotiations between two neighboring cities the citizens of Los Alamitos, and their city, sought to ensure a higher quality of life for the citizens of not only their community, but also for the citizens of Cypress. We didn’t ask for a park for us, but for a community that is joined across a border that can either be a line on a map, or a gulf of misunderstanding. We asked for good faith negotiations, to keep open spaces that we feel add to the quality of the lives of both our communities. We who negotiated thought that “good faith” would be important, that “good faith” and a covenant between us to make our joined communities better was enough. We had no idea that the greed and avarice of one man could render asunder the hopes and dreams of a shared increase and maintenance of the quality of life we thought both communities wanted and deserved.
In the spirit of those forward thinking Cypress residents that fought for open spaces in 1987, I ask that today’s citizens leave the door open to good faith and the promise of a higher quality of life for both our communities and vote No on Measure A.
JM Ivler
Los Alamitos
Don’t be fooled again
Like Measure L, Measure A is over 150 pages of new Cypess law written by Sacramento developer Christo Bardis’ attorneys.
Like L, A takes away voter control of dozens of acres of open space won by dedicated Cypress citizens in 1987, before Bardis bought the property.
Like L, A is essentially a piecemeal up-zone so Bardis can “flip” the parcels and pocket millions in extra profits.
Last year, Bardis gave us L, a seniors’ center that turned into a trucking terminal, unless we stop it. Don’t be fooled twice! Vote No on A!
Dave Emerson
Los Alamitos
What happened to the senior housing project?
Dear Editor,
I never have been one to tell folks which way to cast a vote, nor do I support any specific political party. California’s propositions and measures are all new to me. I’m still learning thru media and listening to folk’s comments at council meetings in Cypress, of which now I’m a resident. I’ve only been here for coming up on two years.
Our relocation to Cypress from Virginia was a move based solely on the needs of one due to the lost of Lillian’s father. Lil grew up here in Cypress, her family goes back to 1962, all her siblings’ grew up here and her Dad (now passed) taught school until retirement in this area, so in this household, there exist a core value and understanding of the impacts of change specifically those of a positive developmental progression and those that can easily take a negative turn.
It was only days after our arrival that Marge (Lil’s Mom) got in a conversation with us about the new Senior Housing project that was coming with the passage of Measure L. We all agreed this was a good move to rezone open ground base on a development of housing facilities for our seniors. This would create a percentage of job opportunities as well as revenues for the city, plus it also provides for neighboring towns and cities. I know Lil and I had good things to say about this new zoning.
So, what happen to the proposed senior care facility? Does anybody factually really know? I’ve heard that the developer backed out of the deal. Did they really do this or were they simply out-bided? Were they ever really part of the measure at all? I have yet to hear any explanation for this. What I do know is simply picking up a piece of paper in early April of this year that had been placed under our doormat that informed us of Prologis. I gave it to Marge, only to witness her inflamed comments for the first time. Well, this piece of paper got everyone here going to council meetings and reading all the editorials from multiple sources and I should mention all the mailers we are getting and of course the posted signs on Cerritos Avenue.
The Measure “A” vote is just around the corner now and many have voiced, posted online and written comments to the editorials as I’m attempting to do. Those things that “stand out” to me are the protocol of shared information that did not exist after Measure L passed. I think many would agree that the shift from senior housing to warehousing and distribution was nothing short of big corporation maneuvering. They have the “means” to breach the hurdles and deceitfully gain the loyalties of local governments. I find myself very frustrated with the “ill will” that seems to exist between Los Alamitos and Cypress at present and maybe other neighboring folks I don’t know about. All of this certainly has not placed our voted in leadership in a positive perspective or others who have shifted their opinions.
I would recommend to our council that the citizens of Cypress received a factual explanation as to “what happen to the senior housing proposal?”
Tom Snoddy
Cypress