Clouds hovering over the muddy, state-ordered demise of the Redevelopment Agency parted only slightly this afternoon when City Hall announced evident progress on the potential disposition of two of its prized redevelopment properties.
City Hall is attempting to move the sale of both Parcel B, Downtown, and the northeast corner of Washington Boulevard/Centinela sufficiently out of reach by the Feb. 1 dissolution date so the state cannot “re-possess” them, further depriving the city of revenue.
The trouble is, say City Manager John Nachbar and Mayor Mehaul O’Leary, that since 400 cities losing Redevelopment Agencies at the same time, every community is operating in previously untraveled waters. No compass is known to be available to explain the “rules” that went into effect on Dec. 29.
Meanwhile, Mr. O’Leary and City Council colleague Andy Weissman hope to meet Sunday morning with Assemblymember Holly J. Mitchell to familiarize her with the city’s most urgent needs.
Ms. Mitchell has been named to a Sacramento committee charged with two tasks:
• Seeking a stay for breathing room for the Agencies and
• Developing at least a vague roadmap to follow when spring starts next month
No one in Sacramento or Culver City seems to know at what stage the pending purchases by developers must reach to elude state control.
At the City Council meeting of Monday, Jan. 30 — 48 hours before the Agency is to dissolve in mid-air — the city is expected the state of negotiations with the sale of Parcel B to Combined Properties/Hudson Properties, and Washington-Centinela to two other builders.
Cautiously, delicately, Mr. Nachbar was meticulous in shaping his responses.
“We are working to secure them further,” he said, “via contractual methods.”
What do you anticipate for Jan. 30?
“We hope to have those properties further contractually obligated.”
Since the State Supreme Court’s vanquishment of Redevelopment Agencies two weeks ago today seems to deprive you of leverage in sales talks, are you not at a disadvantage in negotiations?
“No, I don’t think so. Because time is of the essence, it is fascinating how you have compressed time frames, it compels both parties to be more realistic.”
Do you have to complete negotiations by Feb. 1, three weeks from yesterday?
“Let me put it this way, it is our belief that — I want to make sure I say this correctly because this could be read back to me in a court of law…
“We won’t know the answer to that. We are trying to place ourselves in the best position possible. We are trying to ensure that the projects we have envisioned come to fruition. The ultimate outcome will be determined in the future.”
Turning philosophical, Mr. Nachbar ended with:
“There is no certainty in anything in life I suppose. We are trying to do the best we can.”
