Meeting: City Council

Meeting Time: May 14, 2024 at 6:00pm PDT
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

8.7. Fiscal Year 2024-2025 General Fund Budget Balancing Proposal.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    Eichler homes are a labor of love, time and money to keep them preserved.

    As a responsible Eichler home owner we don’t just try to maintain the houses in the state we bought them. We try to bring them to a state where they will be enjoyed for many years to come. Where people drive through the neighborhood feeling driving down memory lane, rather than seeing a sad shadow of a decaying long forgotten piece of Architecture.

    The Mills Act helps in offsetting these maintenance efforts, but by no means covers them. The city benefits by creating attractive neighborhoods that are one of a kind.

    Therefore I oppose the Moratorium and hope for understanding of the City council to keep what makes the City of Orange a unique experience.

    Andre Franco Luis

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I strongly oppose the proposed moratorium on the Mills Act program in Orange. Investing in restoring and maintaining these homes boost property values. These historic neighborhoods are what draw so many people to live here. Please do not alter these contracts!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    As the owner of a historic property, I oppose any changes to the Mills Act program unless the city provides data to show that such changes will meaningfully impact the city’s budget. Any such proposal should be put up to a vote prior to instituting changes to the Mills Act. Our family takes pride in living in a historical home and preserving local heritage.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    As a homeowner in the Eichler historic district and a Mills Act participant, I strongly oppose any moratorium without further evaluation and public review of the financial impact by the city. Additionally, there needs to be public review and comment periods related to any changes to existing Mills Act contracts. As others have mentioned in their comments, we entered into our agreement with the city to invest in the maintenance and upkeep of our historic property and have upheld our commitments. The assumption is that the city entered into the agreement with a full understanding of the financial implications of adopting the Mills Act and planned accordingly when doing so.

    For all of the process and discourse required to adopt the program, it would be disappointing if any decisions were made to alter or eliminate it now without similar review and discourse.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I can understand if the city needs to put a hold on approving additional Mills Act properties going forward. I cannot understand how any existing Mills Act contracts can be altered during the specified period which both parties to the contract agreed to in writing. In some cases, property owners may have already spent the money to completely fulfill their obligation under the contract believing the city would live up to their end of the deal.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I oppose the proposed moratorium on the Mills Act program in Orange. While budget constraints are a concern, altering existing and future Mills Act contracts without comprehensive studies of its economic impact could jeopardize our city's historic preservation efforts. The Mills Act is vital in incentivizing property owners to invest in restoring and preserving historic buildings, enhancing neighborhood stability and property values. Please prioritize the preservation of our city's heritage by safeguarding the Mills Act program.

    Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I strongly oppose the moratorium of the Mills Act.
    A comprehensive study should be done before making such a decision, especially for a proposed revenue of only 13k!
    The city of Orange is rich in architectural history, thanks to the Mills Act! Stopping, or limiting the number of applications/contracts would be detrimental to our city’s architectural heritage.
    In addition, those who are already under a Mills Act contract, like myself, have already greatly invested in preserving our historical homes due to the incentives the Mills Act provides; not to mention, it’s a legally binding contract.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    It seems to me it would do more harm than good to change the Mills Act. Myself and my neighbors who live in historic homes have invested in restoration because of the Mills Act. Have there been any studies to show that repealing the Mills Act will actually save the city of Orange money? Orange has been proud to be at the forefront of saving and rehabilitating historic homes. What a shame to lose that distinction because the city MIGHT save money.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I oppose any changes to the Mills Act. Trying to tie the Mills Act to the budget deficit without ANY data is ridiculous and counter productive. Without Mills the city stands to lose parts of what makes it special.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I strongly oppose any alterations to the Mills Act program! I was born and raised on Orange, now I live in the city and own a historic home. The Mills Act has been a benefit to continue to preserve the historic homes’ character and to contribute to the value of the neighborhood. This is a common sentiment of our neighbors who have Mills Act contracts. PLEASE DO NOT ALTER THE CONTRACTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I absolutely oppose any changes of the Mills Act Revenue after it was agreed that we would it be active for 10 years. We have really followed all the guidelines during renovations according to the The Mills Act and also one of the many reasons why we purchased the property.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I wholeheartedly disagree with the proposed sale of the Taft Branch of the Orange Public Library. This is merely a band-aid for a much more complex mismanagement of city funds. If this branch is closed and the land is liquidated, this densely populated area of Orange will be completely underserved without these important services in the near and distant future.

    Given the list of public services and activities that are on the council’s chopping block, it makes it clear that the Taft Branch is an even more valuable asset for our community members. This library does not exist as merely a line item: the branch is a neighborhood safe haven. It is imperative that this library, as well as all our city libraries remain open and available, provide access to literature, information and services to ensure equity and foster democracy in the city of Orange.

    I implore the city council members to reconsider the closure and sale of the Taft Library. Your decision will far outlast your tenure and its repercussions will be multigenerational. Make the conscientious choice and remove the closure and sale of this library from your expenditure reduction ledger!

    Victoria Owens

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    As an Orange taxpayer and owner of a historic property, I do not support any changes to the Mills Act program. We entered into a 10-year contract with the city and have held up our end, and the City should hold up its end of the contract. The Mills Act program allows owners to invest in making their homes and neighborhoods (and therefore the City of Orange) beautiful which helps to maintain high property values and the City's unique architectural heritage. The Council should facilitate comprehensive studies about the program's impact before considering any major changes.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I strongly urge the Council to NOT change the Mills Act program. The heart of Old Town Orange is the historic homes. No longer helping to maintain these homes will do irreparable harm to the city's long term health. Without the Mills Act support, Orange will usher in a wave of tearing these homes down for more apts for Chapman students. Keep the Mills Act in place!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I oppose the reduction of the Mills Act Revenue especially without data to back this decision. The Mills Act was a huge reason we ultimately decided to purchase a home in Orange. We have spent a large sum of money restoring our home according to Mills Act guidelines- and made expensive restorations we might not have otherwise done because of Mills Act requirements.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    We’ve already started home improvements based on the Mills Act investment incentives. The only way the budget made sense was based on the property savings the Mills Act provided. Removing this from existing approved applicants puts undo hardship on people and families.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    The Mills Act was a huge defining reason we purchased a home in Orange because we wanted to own an Eichler. We anticipate this being our forever home and have created a long term plan on restoring this home based on the Mills Act. Please keep this program in tact.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    As an Orange resident and owner of a historic property, I do not support any changes to the Mills Act program unless the city provides data to show that such changes will meaningfully impact the city’s budget. In addition, the city must present a proposal that is put up to a vote prior to instituting changes to the Mills Act. Astonishing and disappointing to see such an important program silently added to the agenda.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    I oppose the Mills Act revenue reduction. The short term gains are not worth the value the homes and communities bring the city as a whole.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 6 months ago

    The Mills Act is a vital measure and tool to ensure that our historic structures are preserved. We have an amazing amount of history in Orange County and should not let a short-sided fiscal benefit put that in jeopardy.