Silverlakes in hot water?

soccerstud said:
Can someone smarter than me dummy this article for me, please? Seems like Silverlakes is in trouble with the county for not being a "public" park as approved (read article below). Seems like the county is "urging" Silverlakes to stop charging for parking, amongst other things....hhmmm, interesting

https://www.pe.com/2018/05/22/grand...th-admission-fee-sit-down-restaurant-and-bar/
Click to expand...

I'm guessing those parking fee's built that restaurant, bar and horse area....talk about killing their revenue stream, does that means tournaments would go up to $3K per team? :eek:
 
soccerstud said:
Can someone smarter than me dummy this article for me, please? Seems like Silverlakes is in trouble with the county for not being a "public" park as approved (read article below). Seems like the county is "urging" Silverlakes to stop charging for parking, amongst other things....hhmmm, interesting

https://www.pe.com/2018/05/22/grand...th-admission-fee-sit-down-restaurant-and-bar/
Click to expand...

Silverlakes (as in the Balboa Group, which runs the facility) is not in trouble, but the City of Norco has some explaining to do to the County of Riverside as to way they entered into a ground lease with a private company that intended to operate the property as it is currently being operated.

Overlap said:
I'm guessing those parking fee's built that restaurant, bar and horse area....talk about killing their revenue stream, does that means tournaments would go up to $3K per team? :eek:
Click to expand...

The Balboa Group took out about $26,000,000 (million) dollars in bond money (loans) to build the property (field, amenities, restaurant, etc.) and has additional "insider" debt on its books. The parking fees are absolutely necessary for the company to pay back its obligations. In other words, Silverlakes would not exist if not for those parking fees and yes tournament fees would be much higher if parking could not be collected.

The Grand Jury won't do anything unless a member of the public complains loud enough to get the Grand Jury's attention, which is likely what happened here. The Grand Jury will "investigate" and then issue a report. If the report concludes there was a crime or other malfeasance then it might escalate, but we are a ways away from anything like that happening.
 
So, where we are now is the Report has been issued and the Grand Jury has concluded (not legally binding in any manner) that the DA should take a look at the contracts, orders, etc. because it (the Grand Jury) believes that public parks should be free. The problem here is large "regional" parks operating by the Federal Govt., State Govt., and other local Govt. all charge admission and vehicle fees.

Here is the report:
https://www.countyofriverside.us/Po...es_Final_Report.pdf?ver=2018-05-21-084158-947
 
I wonder if the San Diego County Grand Jury would have a similar interest in the Oceanside soccer fields. What was built has little resemblance to the materials published by the City of Oceanside supposedly representing the development plans.
 
MWN said:
So, where we are now is the Report has been issued and the Grand Jury has concluded (not legally binding in any manner) that the DA should take a look at the contracts, orders, etc. because it (the Grand Jury) believes that public parks should be free. The problem here is large "regional" parks operating by the Federal Govt., State Govt., and other local Govt. all charge admission and vehicle fees.

Here is the report:
https://www.countyofriverside.us/Po...es_Final_Report.pdf?ver=2018-05-21-084158-947
Click to expand...

So the operators put in some trees, a few picnic tables (and avoid adding BBQ's by highlighting fire hazard/pollution/carbon emission concerns) and allow City of Norco residents to enter for free (everyone else pays). Perhaps some town officials get bad press and have limited political future. I am betting the operator gets in return an acknowledgement that the facility now complies with the deed restrictions, and perhaps additional development rights that will help them pay for the maintenance of the free park additions.

Unless they can find they somehow used City and/or bond funds for prohibited or illegal purposes, seems like this will have little impact on the facility. Let us all hope that is the case, as it is a nice regional asset.
 
Dos Equis said:
So the operators put in some trees, a few picnic tables (and avoid adding BBQ's by highlighting fire hazard/pollution/carbon emission concerns) and allow City of Norco residents to enter for free (everyone else pays). Perhaps some town officials get bad press and have limited political future. I am betting the operator gets in return an acknowledgement that the facility now complies with the deed restrictions, and perhaps additional development rights that will help them pay for the maintenance of the free park additions.

Unless they can find they somehow used City and/or bond funds for prohibited or illegal purposes, seems like this will have little impact on the facility. Let us all hope that is the case, as it is a nice regional asset.
Click to expand...
Some trees would be great! Not attending a lot of games anymore, I forgot to pack the car to watch the kiddos and it was blazing hot. A great facility thou. I wish they had this place around for my call of duty.
 
Fact said:
Some trees would be great! Not attending a lot of games anymore, I forgot to pack the car to watch the kiddos and it was blazing hot. A great facility thou. I wish they had this place around for my call of duty.
Click to expand...
and maybe a giant wall to block the freaking high winds after 12:00PM?... :D
 
soccerstud said:
Can someone smarter than me dummy this article for me, please? Seems like Silverlakes is in trouble with the county for not being a "public" park as approved (read article below). Seems like the county is "urging" Silverlakes to stop charging for parking, amongst other things....hhmmm, interesting

https://www.pe.com/2018/05/22/grand...th-admission-fee-sit-down-restaurant-and-bar/
Click to expand...

What is different between Silverlakes and Oceanside? I would like free parking, paved parking lot, trees and picnic tables at Oceanside.
 
Surfref said:
What is different between Silverlakes and Oceanside? I would like free parking, paved parking lot, trees and picnic tables at Oceanside.
Click to expand...
The Silverlakes property has a judicially created covenant that requires the property to be a public park. I don't know about Oceanside, but its unlikely there is a covenant/restriction that uses the same language.
 
MWN said:
The Silverlakes property has a judicially created covenant that requires the property to be a public park. I don't know about Oceanside, but its unlikely there is a covenant/restriction that uses the same language.
Click to expand...

The Oceanside site was donated to the city after a sand-quarry owner was done with it. The donor got a big tax break from his donation. I'm not sure how many restrictions there are on land use there - in fact, both the original City plan and the soccer field developer plan include commercial buildings (office, hotel, restaurant, etc) but none of that is happening yet. When the City sold the voters on the site, it was pictured as a rolling park, shaded by numerous clumps of trees, with scattered parking and picnic areas, and a few sports fields separated from each other.
 
We pay thousands for our kids to play club soccer but complain about the cost of parking to maintain one of the best facilities in so cal?

I'll gladly pay Disneyland parking prices to keep this gem open and the grass green.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top