Now the anxious, new-father-style waiting begins inside of City Hall.
The state Legislature is expected to start deliberating tomorrow over Gov. Brown’s bombshell proposal to vanquish all of California’s community redevelopment agencies, a controversial move he predicts will net $1 billion in savings, putting a 1/28th dent in the state’s deficit.
The complexities of the governor’s tactic are considerably more dense than clear, and his projected outcome is disputed across California as small and big towns call urgent meetings to design their fending-off strategies.
Even though this is the Dr. Martin Luther King holiday, Santa Monica, for example, was scheduled to meet today to determine its defense.
After Culver City’s gravely endangered Redevelopment Agency huddled in an emergency session on Saturday afternoon to fortify its turf against an expected killer invasion from the governor’s office, the five elected officials appeared satisfied they had done all they could to minimize the damage.
On a historic day, they essayed unprecedented and far-reaching decisions spanning improvement/redevelopment projects that may not be completed until decades into the misty future.
“The governor’s proposal has the potential to be disastrous for communities,” Agency member Andy Weissman told the newspaper. “We have a responsibility, pre-emptively, to make sure we have protected ourselves against the worst.
“If it doesn’t happen, okay. None of us wanted to be in a position where if we guessed wrong, the community would be hurt.”
Even though the governor and the overwhelmingly Democratic state legislature are of the same party for the first time since the days of the ousted Gray Davis, the lawmakers’ requisite endorsement dawdles in doubt.
For Mr. Brown, numerous pothole-style hurdles remain between here and a likely statewide special election in June.
It Felt Different
Before a smallish audience of two dozen, the Agency, led by Mehaul O’Leary, approved and physically executed contracts totaling an estimated $400 million and covering scores of projects. The agreements were signed by Mr. O’Leary and Mayor Chris Armenta.
“The key to our effort,” said Mr. Weissman, “was to make sure there were legally binding contracts executed and in place in case the legislature acts as early as tomorrow, which motivated the need for Saturday’s meeting.”
The tone and script of the meeting differed sharply from the standard contentious Monday night meetings in City Hall.
Instead of hewing to a community-driven agenda, the Agency sat back and listened, principally, to two City Hall experts before enthusiastically plunging into a series of unanimous votes that will keep Agency-(style?) construction humming years after all members have returned to private life.
With Community Development Director Sol Blumenfeld and counsel Murray Kane serving as tour guides, explaining the bold steps they recommended the Redevelopment Agency to take to guard against a debilitating raid from Sacramento, the repeated accord on the dais was deafening. There was no dissension or hesitancy on the part of any member although Scott Malsin and Mr. Weissman handled the majority of Agency commentary.
Given the disputable, volatile nature of Mr. Brown’s previously unanticipated proposition, everyone present seemed to understand this was a death-bed scenario, a seriously threatening and family-unifying moment.
It was no time for petty complaints.
Mostly, the activists in the audience were quiescent, choosing observation over participation.
