Part four
Re “Bald Is Foiled Again, and That Is Energizing”
[Editor’s Note: The present four-day-old debate over redevelopment agencies, which are facing a gubernatorial death sentence, was ignited by an editorial in the Los Angeles Titanic last Sunday that maintained building affordable housing not only was the main purpose of agencies, but their overwhelming mission, dwarfing all others. Many disagree.]
Who will win the winner-takes-all taffy pull between small-town redevelopment agencies, such as Culver City’s, and Gov. Bald Retread, who has exclusively devoted his first three months in office to finding allies in his budget-driven quest to abolish them?
Bald was a lopsided favorite at the start. He remains likely to prevail, just a little less so than in January.
Like its 397 agency colleagues around the state, Culver City plans to keep breathing, but all the death sentence action is in Sacramento.
Any hour there could be a pivotal change from the governor’s ongoing failure to win miniscule but crucial Republican support.
Until then, hometown agency members such as Scott Malsin will keep on talking, hoping to make a difference and win a grudging pardon.
So Argue with This
From yesterday, you may remember he started out addressing the question:
What are the priorities of the Redevelopment Agency?
After explaining how bountifully and dutifully City Hall has produced revenue for state government and should be seen as a partner rather than the enemy, Mr. Malsin said:
“The Westfield (Fox Hills Mall) renovation is a great example of why the Redevelopment Agency should stay in business, both for the benefit of Culver City as well as Sacramento. Our total investment of $10 million has helped to generate $100 million or so in taxable sales per year, which means $1 million back to the city of Culver City per year and $7 million per year, plus or minus, to the state of California, per year.
“If you can show me any investment I can make where I could earn 100 percent back on my money in 18 months or so, I am in.
Who Is Kidding Whom?
“That is the way Sacramento should be looking at what redevelopment agencies do. I hold our Agency to a very high standard. I expect that what we do is for the purpose of generating tax revenue to support general city services. If the geniuses in Sacramento feel that the standard ought to be more clear, I would support that.
“But the idea that the people of California somehow are going to be better off having the money we have been investing carefully and wisely in the community, flow up to Sacramento to be used there, if you believe that, I have got a bridge to sell you.”
Where is affordable housing on the list of Redevelopment Agency priorities?
“Twenty percent of the tax increment funds the city receives goes for the purpose of creating affordable housing. It’s a matter of law. That is a priority. It is not a lower priority. Twenty percent must go for affordable housing.
“It is pretty hard to create affordable housing on the Westside of Los Angeles. Now that we have a City Council that has some nerve, we are doing a pretty good job.”
Next in line to answer the key question about priorities was Mehaul O’Leary, the very busy Chair of the Redevelopment Agency for the past 11 months.
He answered promptly and succinctly.
“Eliminate blight and provide affordable housing.”
[In the final installment, Agency member Andy Weissman will give a more elaborate response.]
