The city of Banning is moving forward with eminent domain proceedings to acquire a vacant property considered essential to the planned Village at Paseo San Gorgonio project across from City Hall.

Acting as the community redevelopment agency, the Banning city council voted 5-0 Tuesday evening to adopt two measures related to acquisition of 220 E. Ramsey St., and 5-0 on a dupiclate measure as the council.

The property has not been developed since 1969, when a building on the .35-acre parcel was demolished, according to city staff.

In March, the city made an offer of $75,000 to the property owners, based on an appraised value of the property. The city has received no response from the owners, who include Frederick Huang, Audie Huang, and Jen Huang, all of Santa Ana, according to city staff.

City Manager Andy Takata sent a certified letter to the property owners in April.

"Dear Property Owners:

"On March 12, 2011, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Banning (the "Agency") made an offer to purchase the property identified as Assessor's Parcel No. 541-183-001-1 in the City of Banning, California, located at 220 E. Ramsey Street. The Agency reiterates its previous offer to purchase the property for $75,000, subject to the conditions stated in the offer.

"You are also hereby notified that the Agency intends to consider the adoption of a resolution of necessity authorizing acquisition of the property by eminent domain."

Takata's letter included information about Tuesday night's meeting and advised the property owners of their right to appear at the meeting and be heard.

The Huangs did not attend the meeting and no one stepped forward to represent them.

Banning resident Don Smith said he supported the city decision to exercise eminent domain on 220 E. Ramsey St., but he added a note of caution.

"I'm in favor of this motion, but I also hesitate," Smith said. "I don't remember the last time the city of Banning used eminent domain to adversely acquire property. I know sometimes we use it for tax purposes because the person we're buying the property from wants us to do it.

"I can't remember the last time we did it adversely, and it's a slippery slope," Smith said. "Now this land happens to be vacant land, this guy has no vested interest in the land, he's not there, he doesn't have a business. So I think we should proceed.

"But I'm telling you if there were a business here or this was an old house and somebody still lived there, I'd be adamantly opposed to this."

Council members Tuesday night expressed qualified reservations about exercising eminent domain law to acquire property, but indicated the city has no other choice.

"Eminent domain, and all the negative connotations, it seems to me this project is a perfect example of redevelopment, revitalizing the old, blighted downtown," Councilmember Bob Botts said. "This parcel of land in the middle of the project, there's no question about the necessity.

"You've already alluded to the fact you've tried to contact these people by phone and otherwise," Botts said to Takata and City Attorney David Aleshire. "And formally by mail, they signed the certified letter. There's no question they know what the proceedings are.

"I want to remind myself and a few previous speakers that this city is on record, either by resolution or by ordinance, not to use eminent domain against residential properties. . . . But this is a classic example, non-residential, unresponsive person, disinterested, and a vacant piece of property, and this will help the greater good for downtown Banning."

 A court complaint for eminent domain acquisition of the property may be ready in a few weeks, Aleshire said. An eminent domain court proceeding can take a year and half to resolve, but the city will have the option to ask the court for "immediate possession," Aleshire said.

In the meantime the city remains open to negotiations with the Huangs, Aleshire said in a phone interview.

The resolutions approved 5-0 by the community redevelopment agency Tuesday were:

- No. 2011-17, "Declaring that Public Interest and Necessity Require Acquisition of a Fee Interest in Property Known as Assessor's parcel No. 541-183-001-1 (220 E. Ramsey Street)

- No. 2011-18, "adopting Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitorimng Program for the Village at Paseo San Gorgonio Project, which includes the property at 220 E. Ramsey St.

The second resolution was voted on after a public hearing titled "Approval of an Environmental Document - Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Eminent Domain Proceedings for 220 E. Ramsey Street."