This page is a repository of various articles on the subject, generally from the San Diego Union-Tribune.
12/31/2009
http://thecoastnews.com/2009/12/homeowners-finance-city-replacement-of-streetlights/
Homeowners finance city replacement of streetlights
OCEANSIDE — Over the next two months, the city of Oceanside will be removing rust-damaged street light poles in the Rancho Del Oro neighborhood located on and adjacent to College Boulevard between State Highway 76 and Oceanside Boulevard. To date, the city has surveyed approximately 30 percent of the area and found 40 street light poles to be structurally unsound. The city has already removed 25 of the 40, with the total number of removals yet to be determined.
The street poles in question are the responsibility of the Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association; however, due to concerns over the structural integrity of the poles, the city is removing the poles to avoid a potential safety hazard. The poles were installed during the original development of the area in the early 1980s. Many of the poles have rusted which could make them unstable during high winds.
The RDO HOA, through its Street Maintenance Agreement with the city, is responsible for the full cost to replace the streetlights. The city is in discussions with Prescott Companies, the property management company for the HOA to remedy the situation.
1/5/2010
http://activerain.com/blogsview/1416948/rancho-del-oro-community-in-oceanside-california-will-have-street-light-removal-
Rancho Del Oro Community In Oceanside, California Will Have Street Light Removal.
Street Light Removal will be taking place in the Rancho Del Oro Neighborhood over the next two months the City of Oceanside, will be removing structurally unsound street light poles. To date the City of Oceanside, has survey approximately 30% of the area and found 40 street light poles to be structurally unsound. 25 of the 40 have been removed with the total number removals yet to be
determined.
These street lights were installed in the early 1980’s and the poles are showing signs of rust deterioration which could make them unstable during high winds.
The cost to remedy this situation is being discussed with Rancho Del Oro HOA.
3/1/2010 San Diego Union Tribune
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/01/dispute-over-light-fixtures-keeps-rancho-del-oro/
THE PROBLEM: It’s pretty dark at night along some formerly well-lighted streets in Oceanside’s Rancho del Oro community, and even during the day it’s not hard to see why.
Where dozens of lights once stood, now sit only orange traffic cones.
All three lamps on Ronda Snow’s cul-de-sac were removed, leaving the area “absolutely pitch black” at night, she said.
“It’s extremely unsafe for people to walk with their children or pets at night,” Snow said.
Some streets remain well-illuminated, but Snow checked around and found others with one or two out of three lights gone.
Then there are the leftover light bases, Snow said, some of which have bolts or screws protruding from the cones.
A letter to residents in December from the Villages of Rancho del Oro Homeowners Association attributed the removal to the city’s maintenance budget, but it left many questions unanswered. Snow asked Just Fix It “who’s responsible” for safely lighted streets.
STATUS: The answer is a matter of dispute between the city and the homeowners association.
In the late 1980s, Prescott Cos., the developer of Rancho del Oro, opted for a distinctive streetscape for the community. Instead of standard concrete light poles that have an expected life span of 30 to 40 years, Prescott installed metal ones, along with upgraded street and traffic signs.
Joseph Arranaga, deputy public works director for Oceanside, said six poles toppled last year, revealing a widespread safety problem with corrosion at the bases of the metal poles. Because the poles were installed with the understanding that they would not be replaced at public expense, Arranaga said the city asked the homeowners group to remove additional poles.
It declined, and after an inspection determined 132 out of 670 lights needed to come down, the city did the work itself.
“Those were the ones that were in danger of falling on somebody,” Arranaga said.
Jonathan Massie, attorney for the homeowners association, said “there’s a disagreement over … the root cause” of the damage to the poles. Massie said that he preferred not to go into details on negotiations with the city, but that there’s an issue over “whether (the poles) were properly maintained.”
There have been two meetings on the matter so far.
For now, Arranaga said, any problems with the bases will be addressed in three to four weeks.
WHO’S RESPONSIBLE: To be determined. Joseph Arranaga can be reached at (760) 435-4500 or at jarranaga@ci.oceanside.ca.us.
3/4/2013 San Diego Union Tribune
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/mar/04/streetlights-rancho-del-oro-judge-rules/?
print&page=all
Judge sides with city on streetlights
Rancho Del Oro group wants cityofficials to replace rusted fixtures
By Ray Huard3:33 p.m.March 4, 2013Updated3:28 p.m.
Rancho Del Oro residents have failed to persuade a judge that city officials should be forced to replace rusting streetlights in their Oceanside neighborhood.
A homeowners group called the Village of Rancho Del Oro Association sued Oceanside after city workers in December 2009 and January 2010 removed 132 Rancho Del Oro streetlights that officials said were so rusted that they were in danger of falling down. The city then refused to replace the decorative lights, which were installed years ago by the developer who built the neighborhood.
Vista Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Stern ruled on Feb. 22 that the city is under no obligation to replace them or to replace the more than 500 rusting streetlights that remain.
City Attorney John Mullen said Friday that if Rancho Del Oro residents want the streetlights replaced, they can agree to pay a special assessment to cover the cost. He said it would cost about $3,500 per pole to replace the lights.
“We’ve always said throughout this lawsuit that there is a mechanism for the lights to be replaced,” Mullen said.
A lawyer for the homeowners association, Rian Jones, said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the judge’s ruling.
Although the ruling means the city has no legal obligation to replace the lights, Jones said the city has a moral obligation to replace them and to do a better job maintaining the remaining lights.
“It just takes a little bit of rust prevention” and ensuring that sprinkler systems don’t soak the base of the poles with water. He said the maintenance could be little more than “a little bit of silicon here, a little bit or Rust-Oleum there.”
Replacing the streetlights is “a health and safety issue for the protection of the citizens out there,” Jones said. “They don’t like living in the dark, they don’t like their streets being dark. Rancho Del Oro, if the city continues doing what they’re doing, will be left without streetlights.”
City officials have projected that Oceanside will have a $1.3 million budget surplus at the end of this fiscal year, and Jones said at least some of that money should go to replacing Rancho Del Oro’s streetlights.
“The association and its members feel their complaints are falling on deaf ears and the only thing that will spur the city of Oceanside into action is if and when there is a problem out there, someone is injured or killed in a traffic accident on a dark street,” Jones said. “The citizens who live in that area don’t want to wait for the horrible to happen before the city is spurred into action.”
The problem goes back to the 1980s when Rancho Del Oro was built and the developer installed decorative streetlights with metal poles instead of the standard city streetlights with concrete poles.
Because they rust, the metal poles last about 20 years compared to about 50 years for concrete poles, according to city officials.
To pay for the maintenance and replacement of streetlights throughout Oceanside, the city formed a citywide street lighting district in 1991 that levies an annual assessment placed on the property tax bills of city homeowners.
On streets with lights, the typical assessment for a single family homeowner is $15.80 per year, according to court documents. The annual assessment is about $3.18 for a typical single family homeowner in neighborhoods with no streetlights.
In Rancho Del Oro, the annual assessment was reduced to $3.18 for those who live on streets where the lights were removed, the city said in court documents.
In its lawsuit, the Rancho Del Oro Association contended that the city had misappropriated the money raised through the lighting assessment by not properly maintaining Rancho Del Oro streetlights.
The judge found that the city “provided the same level of service” in Rancho Del Oro “as was provided to the streetlights throughout the rest of the city.”
Also, the judge found that requiring the city to replace the streetlights in the neighborhood would give Rancho Del Oro residents an extra benefit at the expense of other city residents.
© Copyright 2013 The San Diego Union-Tribune, LLC. An MLIM LLC Company. All rights reserved.
4/30/13
LIGHTING-TAX DISTRICT PROPOSED
City may ask Rancho del Oro residents to approve fee to pay for streetlights
By Ray Huard
Homeowners in Oceanside’s Villages of Rancho Del Oro who have been battling to have new streetlights installed in their neighborhood could tax themselves to pay for lights under a plan proposed by City Manager Peter Weiss.
Weiss said the plan, which he will present to the City Council on Wednesday, is the city’s final attempt to resolve a dispute that has festered since December 2010, when city crews began removing some of the community’s 635 decorative streetlights because they had become so rusted that they were in danger of falling down.
“If the residents turn it down and say no, we’ve pretty much exhausted the process,” Weiss said.
The city in February won a lawsuit in which the Villages of Rancho Del Oro Association homeowners group tried to force the city to pay the estimated $2.2 million cost to replace the streetlights.
Vista Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Stern ruled that the city was under no obligation to replace the rusting lights.
The judge found that the developer agreed back in the 1980s that Rancho Del Oro residents would be responsible for the lights if the city allowed him to install decorative lights with metal poles instead of the standard concrete poles the city uses.
Because they rust, the metal poles last about 20 years compared to about 50 years for concrete poles, city officials said.
Weiss said he’s offered a compromise to Prescott Management, the management company that oversees the Villages of Rancho Del Oro, but the company wasn’t interested.
A representative for Prescott Management declined to discuss the matter.
Weiss said the city offered to pay half the cost of replacing streetlights on major streets in the development, with the homeowners paying the full cost of streetlights on side streets.
Under the plan he will present to the council, the city would create a special lighting assessment district — if Rancho Del Oro residents agree — to cover all the streetlights in the neighborhood. Residents would vote on the plan in a special mail ballot.
“All of the homeowners would then have the opportunity to either approve or reject taxing themselves to replace the lights,” Weiss said. “It would be on their property tax bill.”
The tentative idea would be to issue bonds to pay for the lights, which would be paid off over 20 years by annual assessments on Rancho Del Oro homeowners, Weiss said.
The annual assessment would be roughly about $50 per homeowner, Weiss said. He said the city would hire a consultant to determine the exact amount of the assessment.
Rancho Del Oro resident Don Steiner said he’d like to take another look at the compromise Weiss offered before agreeing to tax himself.
If forming the assessment district is the best option, Steiner said he could go along with it as long as the replacement lights are made to last and aren’t “the same rinky-dink lights they put in 20 years ago.”
“Would I be willing to pay for street lighting? Yeah, I would,” Steiner said.
Weiss said the replacement streetlights he’s suggesting are concrete but shaded so they’re a little more decorative than the city’s standard streetlights.
Neighborhood resident John Hacker said he lives in a newer section of the Villages of Rancho Del Oro where the streetlights aren’t rusting. The lights are metal but they’re set in concrete bases so they’re less likely to rust, Hacker said.
“Our lights are fine. It’s the ones that were put in the ’80s that are failing,” Hacker said. He said he’s not too keen on creating an assessment district.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/apr/30/tp-lighting-tax-district-proposed/?print&page=all
5/2/13 San Diego Union Tribune
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/may/01/rancho-del-oros-streetlight-plight/
Rancho del Oro’s streetlight plight: HOA mirrors government
While monitoring the residents of Oceanside’s Rancho del Oro neighborhood’s streetlight plight, I couldn’t help but be struck by the fact that it would appear the community’s homeowners association acted just like so many other community associations do by being penny wise and pound-foolish — and how their actions seem to mirror those of government.
Whether they acted on advice of their management company or out of ignorance, they apparently chose not to allow for any replacement reserves for the lights in their budget.
If they thought they could con the city into picking up the slack for their disregard, they found out otherwise.
It is often said that homeowners associations are the purest form of representative democracy, for better or worse, and I tend to believe that is true. As someone who has helped form them, lived in them and govern them, I have seen the worst of human nature and common sense play havoc on the seemingly simple notion that neighbors should be able to work together for their common interest.
Nowhere is thismore vividly apparent than when it comes to the subject of money. In a typical common-interest subdivision like Rancho del Oro, the initial operating budget is established by the developer and, in some cases, may even be somewhat subsidized by them in the fact that they are the major property owner. While that is going on, everyone is a happy camper and nobody thinks much about the future.
Once a project is fully in the hands of the homeowners though, things start to change. Those monthly dues take on a new meaning and the costs aren’t being controlled to stimulate sales in a project. That’s when people start getting stingy. They start cutting corners on maintenance, skimping on how much is placed in reserve accounts.
I’m not just talking about Rancho del Oro here; I’m talking about HOAs everywhere. Not all, to be sure, but plenty — enough that laws have been passed to curb the most egregious examples of poor management. But it still goes on.
Then there are the officious board members who make the lives of their neighbors miserable by overzealous policing of “rules” with no regard for common sense; others may receive special treatment by the landscape contractors or others who do business with their community, in exchange for their business. Believe me, this goes on, as well.
If any of this sounds vaguely familiar, it should. It’s a prototype for the way our government functions today.
The Republicans’ seeming pathological notion that we must just stop spending money on infrastructure, with no regard for whether the spending in question might be needed (such as Rancho del Oro and its streetlights) is but one example.
I harbor no illusions here. There is waste. At the state level it has been clearly demonstrated — most lately in the Parks Department secret fund revelations.
Like many others, I chose not to vote in favor of measures in the last election that “promised” to fund education because I held deep suspicions that the legislature and the governor would renege on those promises and find a way to raid the cookie jar. It didn’t take long to prove my suspicions correct.
If HOAs are the purest form of representative democracy, and many of them function poorly, what does that portend for us?
What seems to be lost on many is the idea that they are in this together. This shouldn’t be a “me” society. It should be a “we” society.
I’m not saying everything should be rainbows and unicorns and we should all sit around the campfire singing “Kumbaya,” but that it’s important we remember that it is unity as a people that makes us strong. And that even applies to the little things like where we live.
If we all agree as neighbors to help improve our community by digging into our wallets for a few extra dollars, we all benefit. Even some neighborhoods that don’t have associations and have gone through periods of decline have seen the benefits of banding together to clean up, fix up, and paint.
The knee-jerk tendency to resist increased spending for the sake of spending less is, in and of itself, a foolish proposition. Without the full context, including what the penalty might be for not spending now, or budgeting for spending in the future, the losses to residents (or taxpayers) can far exceed any perceived short-term savings.
Whether micro- or macro-government, the principal should be the same.
Effinger writes from San Marcos. He can be reached at: kirkinsanmarcos@att.net.
5/6/13 “Dear Oceanside” Blog post
http://www.dearoceanside.com/rancho-del-oro-streetlights/
While at my favorite Oceanside coffee house this weekend, I read a little piece in The Coast News that almost made me lose my smoothie. Truthfully, I wanted to stay away from politics but this story was too good to pass up.
You see, way back in the 80’s the fancy pants Rancho del Oro development said no thank you to common city streetlights and opted for decorative metal streetlights and agreed to pay for the maintenance through HOA fees. Exactly what small government folks dream of – no government regulation and private sector efficiency. What could go wrong? Well, it turns out a lot.
Fast forward to late 2009 / early 2010 when Oceanside city workers had to remove 132 Rancho del Oro streetlights that were so neglected they were in danger of falling down Seems the HOA had not maintained the lights nor had they saved any money to replace the lights. What’s a respectable HOA to do next? Sue the city, silly fool. Why? I’m not exactly sure – I can’t seem to follow their logic but regardless, they lost. On February 22nd a judge ruled that the city had no obligation to replace the 132 removed streetlights (or the 500 rusting streetlights that remain).
Even after the ruling, the city offered to pay half the cost to replace the streetlights. Why? Not sure, but Rancho del Oro is home to at least one city council member. But no harm, no foul – Prescott Management declined the offer. Instead holding out for full replacement of the streetlights. Now the residents are being offered to tax themselves through bond sales to pay for the full cost of the new lights. The annual assessment would be about $50 per homeowner for 20 years. If council approves the new offer, Rancho del Oro residents would have the opportunity to approve or disapprove through a mail in ballot. If not approved, I guess Rancho Del Oro will be in the dark.
Who pays for all of the city’s legal costs? Well the city, of course! “WE” (the taxpayers) gave up our right to recover costs if the HOA agreed to not appeal the court decision. This was a frivolous lawsuit that never had to happen had certain above middle-income people acted responsibly and maintained their private property. Funny how those that oppose government the loudest are the first to demand their “rightful” share of the tax haul.
~xoxo
Ps. Thinking of protesting the Rancho Del Oro bailout at the next city council meeting? Don’t forget to have the best BBQ in Oceanside first
6/13/13 Coast News
https://thecoastnews.com/blog/2013/06/rancho-del-oro-streetlight-repair-plans-still-pending/
Rancho del Oro streetlight repair plans still pending
OCEANSIDE — Decorative streetlights installed in the Rancho del Oro neighborhood in the 1980s need to be replaced. About one-third of the 640 streetlights have been removed by the city because they have fallen down or deteriorated.
The city and the Villages of Rancho del Oro Association have differing views on whether homeowners or the city are responsible to pay for the replacement of the streetlights.
The HOA filed a lawsuit against the city, charging the city with the obligation to replace the lights. The lawsuit was dismissed and it was determined that the city was not responsible to provide additional maintenance for the streetlights beyond the standard it maintains over other city lights, namely providing electricity and light bulbs.
The city is moving forward with actions to allow Rancho del Oro homeowners to vote on a lighting assessment district to fund the installation and maintenance of its neighborhood streetlights.
Although the lawsuit against the city is already dismissed, Attorney Carrie M. Timko, who represented association members in their lawsuit, said she stands by the belief that the lights are on city property and were dedicated to the city when they were originally installed making them the city’s responsibility.
Furthermore, she said an agreement was signed that stated the city was responsible for maintenance of the streetlights.
“The association never had responsibility to maintain them, ever,” Timko said.
The city has maintained the lights to citywide standards.
Now that the lights need to be replaced opinions are split on who should have to pay.
“The court found the city didn’t have a legal obligation to replace the lights,” City Manager Peter Weiss said. “The expectation is that Rancho del Oro would provide funding to maintain the lights.”
It was included in the 1980s city/homeowner agreement that the HOA would collect fees for any repair and maintenance costs beyond those of standard city streetlights. These funds were never requested by the city. The contract expired after 10 years and was never resigned.
City Attorney John Mullen said the court case never went into discovery to determine how much money the HOA had collected. The court dismissed the case and said the city had fulfilled its obligations to upkeep the lights.
The decorative streetlights are metal and require routine maintenance to withstand the weather. Standard city streetlights are made of concrete and are therefore significantly more durable.
“They (RDO streetlights) require more maintenance,” Timko said. “The key is that they were not maintained. Their idea of maintenance is changing out light bulbs.”
Mullen said the HOA never requested additional maintenance on the lights.
To provide streetlights throughout the city, Oceanside has established lighting assessment districts. Homeowners pay a minimum sum for streetlights. The city then supplements the cost of supplying electricity and changing light bulbs with gas tax funds and city general funds if needed and available. This year, $400,000 in gas tax funds was designated to supplement citywide lighting costs.
The proposed RDO lighting assessment district will collect fees from homeowners in that neighborhood to pay for replacement of downed lights and routine maintenance.
“We don’t have an obligation to replace the decorative lights without a funding source,” Mullen said.
Timko said the city had an opportunity to form a lighting assessment district when the streetlights were first installed, but failed to do so.
“Now they’re trying to backpedal and do it now,” she said.
Timko said the HOA filed a lawsuit against the city after City Council “shot down” a tentative agreement reached by the HOA and city staff.
“The association had to file a lawsuit to preserve their right to do things,” Timko said.
She said this included their right to obtain requested documents and public records.
Mullen said he strongly disagrees with Timko’s statements about why the lawsuit was filed. He said the city proposed solutions to replace the lights before the lawsuit was filed and prepared 1,731 pages of requested documents for pickup. Upon being notified the documents were ready, Timko’s firm, Epsten Grinnell & Howell Attorneys at Law, refused to pay the 10 cents a page copy fee for the documents.
Timko also said that she objects to what she calls City Council, “coming out in full force” against the HOA following the lawsuit.
“Association members are not the bad guys,” Timko said. “They didn’t do anything wrong.”
Mullen said he could not speak to Timko’s comment about the city, “coming out in full force” against the HOA, because he does not know what she is referencing.
Mullen added that the city has been trying to resolve the issue and is continuing to do so with the establishment of a lighting assessment district.
“We’re back to square one,” Mullen said. “I don’t see any funding.
“They can’t compel spending of general funds proceeds,” Mullen added. “The city is the only one offering solutions. The big concern is they’re loosing their lights one by one. I’d rather be engaging in productive dialog.”
12/17/14 San Diego Union Tribune
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/dec/17/oceanside-rancho-del-oro-streetlights/
City offers to help pay for new lights
Rancho Del Oro residents will be asked to contribute to the project
OCEANSIDE — In an effort to settle an ongoing dispute between the city and residents in an Oceanside neighborhood, the City Council voted unanimously on Wednesday to help pay to replace deteriorating streetlights in the Villages of Rancho Del Oro community.
Under the plan approved by the council, the city will pay $830,000, or 56 percent, of the $1.47 million needed to replace 405 streetlight poles. The residents will be asked to pay the remaining $648,000, or roughly $200 per homeowner.
The neighborhood association will conduct a vote on the proposal. If the residents approve the plan, the city will then hire a contractor to start replacing the light poles.
The project is expected to take about three years to complete, officials said.
Councilwoman Esther Sanchez said the city should help pay for the lighting because it’s a “public safety issue.”
Councilmen Jerry Kern and Jack Feller said they would have preferred a plan that more evenly split the costs between the city and the residents but agreed to the plan as a neighborhood safety matter.
The problem stems from a 1980s agreement struck between the city and the developer, who wanted to use decorative metal streetlight poles in the community instead of the standard concrete poles the city uses.
In exchange for agreeing, city officials at the time said the community would be responsible for the lights.
In 2010, the city began removing some of the metal streetlights because they had started to rust and were in danger of falling down. Residents wanted the city to pay for the replacements but officials said it was the homeowners’ responsibility.
Residents of the Villages of Rancho Del Oro Association sued the city and lost.
In February 2013, Vista Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Stern sided with the city ruling that the city was under no obligation to replace the lights.
The new poles will be made out of concrete.
12/26/14 Coast News
https://thecoastnews.com/blog/2014/12/city-proposes-splitting-streetlight-costs-with-hoa/
OCEANSIDE — On Dec. 17 City Council approved meeting the Rancho del Oro homeowner association (HOA) a little more than halfway in covering the costs of replacing hundreds of dysfunctional streetlights.
The agreement proposed by the city is to pay $830,250, which is the standard cost of replacing streetlights, and have the HOA pay $648,000 in upgrades and labor costs to install the specialty lights.
The HOA still needs to approve the agreement before it is final. If approved, Rancho del Oro homeowners will have a one-time assessment of about $200 per household to pay for the streetlights.
A similar agreement was previously proposed by the city, and turned down by the HOA.
Years ago the builder of Rancho del Oro selected specialty streetlights for the development. The original agreement between the HOA and city was that the city would provide routine maintenance of the lights, and the HOA would pay for needed replacement. That agreement has expired, which adds to the complexity of determining which entity should cover the cost of replacing the lights.
Some of the lights were installed too low into the ground, which has caused them to erode prematurely. Two hundred lights fell into such disrepair they fell down or were removed by the city due to safety concerns.
This has left residents in the dark, while the city and HOA work to determine responsibility and payment.
The city initially offered to pay half the cost of replacing the lights. The HOA refused the offer, took the city to court, and lost.
Courts determined the city did not bear the responsibility of replacing the lights, and recognized the city did not have funds at that time to do so.
The city began renegotiating with the HOA a few months ago, when extra city funds became available to help replace 200 streetlights immediately, and a total of 405 streetlights over the next few years.
City Manager Steve Jepsen said resolving the problem is a matter of the city’s obligation to care for residents who are left without lights due to a poor choice by the developer, and decisions by the HOA.
“The poles were selected by a developer who is long gone,” Jepsen said. “The way they were installed and handled they didn’t have a full life out of it.”
Jepsen said if the HOA does not accept the city’s offer, the issue would remain unresolved.
Council members asked that a clear agreement of further city and HOA responsibility for the streetlights be spelled out, if the city’s offer is accepted.
They added they do not want the action to set a precedent of HOAs expecting the city to pay half of costs.
12/28/14 San Diego Union Tribune (Letters, Local section, B5)
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/dec/28/tp-community-dialog-for-dec-28-2014/
Public money should not be used for poles
The court has said that the city of Oceanside is not liable for the removal/replacement of light poles located in the Villages of Rancho Del Oro; the California Civil Code requires such private associations to maintain reserve accounts for major maintenance projects, as well as liability insurance and other mandates.
Woods/Sanchez have refused a Rancho Del Oro-78 interchange, delegating all the traffic misery to the citizens living near College and El Camino Real.
Contrary to legal decisions and the civil code, Rancho Del Oro owners ignore their legal responsibilities and again receive the protection of Woods/Sanchez through the “donation” of $830,000 in public funds to replace privately owned property.
Public taxpayer funds for private irresponsibility and neglect. Wow.
Nona Switala
Oceanside