By Gail Paparian

It was the only item on the September 14, 2010 Banning City Council meeting agenda … what to charge for the new water/wastewater rates. The rate study had been completed (and billed for); Interim Finance Director Kirby Warner made “staff’s” opinion known.

For a moment, forgetting the facts and the history of why water rates haven’t kept up with capitol needs is not the issue: “Urgency” ordinance was and it was ignored. The Banning city council . . . all of them “continued” the “urgency” issue for another month; albeit some reluctantly! What would they do if something was really urgent!

Countless people got up and . . . said the same thing; after the first original points were made. “It’s against Prop 218,” “it’s illegal,” “blah, blah, blah.” The frustration was real, the information brought forth (as presented as “fact”) wasn’t.

Back in 2005, I was one of the lone “published” voices of what was happening with the $35 million bond issue. Paul Toor was an employee, and so was (then city manager) Randy Anstine (and assistant city manager/finance director) Bonnie Johnson.

Banning had “mortgable” assets: the water and wastewater department of the city. (The city runs its own water/wastewater department). Because the “assets” were real, bonds “could” have been issued on these assets but as it stood ALL OF THE BORROWED MONEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN USED FOR WATER/WASTEWATER PROJECTS.

This is when the “Banning Utility Authority” was created. By its formation, bonds could be sold and used for ANY projects within the city of Banning CIP (Capital Improvement) or otherwise. By lease agreements, money could (and was) transferred to the general fund allowing $17 million to be spent on the erection of the new police station.

Here’s where I’ll say, “check my facts” and if I’m wrong, I’ll buy you a dollar cup of coffee and the recently purchased Haven; the property on the corner of San G and Ramsey that the redevelopment agency paid at least $750,000 to rehab while it was being run by a church by volunteers!

Where’s the Return on Investment? Where are the jobs? Where’s the sales tax being produced from one of Banning’s critical commercial corners. I wish the new owners ongoing and continued success soon.

The Prop. 218 mandated numbers (50 % of registered voters plus 1) fell about 800 votes short of mandating that an increase couldn’t be passed along to the (already) beleaguered residents and (few) businesses in Banning.

Enter the formerly silent giant…. The Sun Lakes Country Club Master Board who voted (unanimously…. Not the residents, the board) to open a petition to recall the Banning city council…. Well, not all of them, just John Machisic, Barbara Hanna and Don Robinson. Since Bob Botts and Debbie Franklin are running for re-election, the powers that be decided to leave their fate to the voters (7 are in the race for Franklin’s and Botts’ seat).

While Machisic and Hanna were on the city council that created the Banning Utility Authority, thereby selling the bonds without a vote of the people, why is Don Robinson involved in the “recall” – save that he sits on the same council. Bob Botts and Debbie Franklin were NOT elected in 2005 (the year or the dastardly bonds) so don’t shoot them, besides, if they are six months from re-election, by law a recall is not an option.

What we have is a dilemma. The city of Banning CANNOT AFFORD THE LUXURY of defaulting on the bond payments and covenants…. It’s that simply. If the city of Banning acts with reckless abandon (as the state of California continues to do), the consequences could be dire. The worst case scenario: the bond holders call in the entire $35 million! While a long shot, it IS possible.

Rather than allowing our local legislative body to put their collective head in the ground, important and unpleasant decisions must be made…. Yesterday.

The beleaguered city of Bell, CA has become a bell-weather of what NOT to do in a city. We as resident-tax payers have no choice but to suck it up and make sure our bond indebtedness is paid.

As I see it, our salvation is not to continue to find ways to cut more services; it is to create a tax base and an economy in Banning to make all of us want to stay. I shudder to think what many residents will do when the housing prices make selling one’s home realistic!