Riverside County Grand Jury • 2017-2018

City of Norco SilverLakes Equestrian and Sports Complex

8 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 3 findings

F1
The original Federal District Court Quit Claim Deed Covenant Restriction issued on June 13, 2002, has never been legally modified, amended, or rescinded. Norco recognized that they were restricted from building this commercial venture and filed a motion in Federal Court for interpretation, modification and/or elimination of the restrictive covenant. The motion was unequivocally denied on November 2, 2004, in the following: …The receiver in this action sold the property at issue on the condition that the deed contain a covenant running with the land restricting the use of the property to park in open space purposes, which was intended for the benefit of the public. The covenant clearly precludes the mixed use project proposed by the City of Norco. Thus, the Court will not construe the covenant as permitting the mixed-use project. Given that the beneficiaries of the covenant include members of the public, the Court will not eliminate the covenant. [sic]
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
a. Riverside County District Attorney’s office investigate the Norco City officials (past and present) for purposefully accepting a bid from a Developer whose intent was to construct a commercial endeavor contrary to the restrictions of a Federal Court order. b. Riverside County District Attorney investigate the Norco City officials (past and present) for presenting misleading documents to the Riverside County Superior Court, thereby obtaining favorable judicial approval for a commercial sports park rather than a genuine public park.
F2
The SilverLakes Equestrian and Sports Complex is not a public park as presented in the 2002 Quit Claim Deed including the Covenant Restriction. The concept plans submitted in 2012 to Riverside County Superior Court for validation gave the impression that there would be limited 5 commercial or money making activities at this property. However, the plans were substantially different from what was actually constructed. The extent of commercial development in the plans submitted to Riverside Superior Court was minimized. For example, the exhibit plans had no reference to constructing a full service commercial restaurant and bar.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
a. Norco and/or the Developer adds to the SilverLakes actual recreational assets and amenities such as shade trees, picnic areas, family play areas, park benches, barbeque grills, basketball courts, tennis courts, bike trails, etc. as intended in the original Quit Claim Deed Covenant definition of a public park. The Developer maintain the Park facilities at no cost to Norco. b. Desist in charging entry fees to Norco residents for entering and using what should be a public park facility.
F3
After reviewing official correspondence, sworn testimony and memos, the Grand Jury discovered that pursuant to the Council’s prior authorization, approximately $1.8 million had been provided to the Developer for water and sewer improvements. However, no loan documentation or legal contracts to support this transfer of funds have been found or provided to the Grand Jury despite subpoenaed requests. The money for the loan was drawn from an existing $39 million Enterprise Revenue Refunding Bond. Although the Bond was not designated for this specific instance, there is a clause in its description which allows Norco to finance up to $6 million for improvements to the City’s Water and Sewer Systems.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Norco publicly disclose a full financial accounting history of monies truly expended for this project. The financial disclosure should 6 include the initial purchase of the property and all loan documentation from 2002 through the current fiscal year. Report Issued: 05/16/2018 Report Public: 05/18/2018 Report Response: 08/18/2018 7 8