(July 31, 2009) -- City management has uploaded an agendizing memo to acompany its August 4 item seeking Council authority "to execute all documents necessary to enter and consummate a real estate exchange of approximately 13.4 acres of City-owned land for approximately 37.77 acres of land owned by LCW Partners, LLC. (Districts 1, 3)"
To view the city management report, authored by Public Works Director Mike Conway and initialed as approved by some individual on behalf of City Manager Pat West, click here.
LBReport.com expects to have much more on this story...but among the points catching our attention immediately, as proposed by city management:
City would spend a (currently estimated) $5 million to move, design and construct a new Public Service facility at the current LB Gas/Oil Dept. site (on Spring St. near 405 fwy). Management proposes to pay for this by tapping a $25 million "Gas Prepay" approved by the City Council on July 21.
City would enter into a lease with LCW Partners, LLC (principal is Tom Dean) letting the City to keep its current Public Service facilities at their present site (proposed to be transferred to Dean) for up to five years. The first two years of the least through July 2012 would cost the City $500,000...which is currently unbudgeted (the lease rate after July 2012 would increase by the CPI). Management's memo says the new facilities will be constructed in 2012.
Management's memo indicates the City is seeking a $500,000 loan from the Redevelopment Agency "to assist with these costs" until the wetland property is sold to the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority [a entity which currently has no state-provided money for the purchase and no date certain for acquiring such sums].
A contract for the transaction is not included; management's memo lists a number of "terms & conditions."
As first reported by LBReport.com, the Aug. 4 agendized item proposes to swap a slightly larger amount of city-owned land -- 13.4 acres instead of 12.1 previously discussed on Feb. 10 -- for a slightly larger amount of open space/presumed wetlands -- 37.77 acres instead of 33.77 acres previously discussed.
Image source: Aug. 4, 2009 LB city management staff report
Image source: Aug. 4, 2009 LB city management staff report
Background
On Feb. 10, 2009, a City Council majority (Schipske and Gabelich dissenting, 1st dist vacant) voted to authorized city management to finalize to conclusion -- without further Council or public review -- an agreement to swap 33.77 acres of LCW-owned land (indicated below) for approximately 12.1 acres of the city owned Public Service Yard.
Immediate prior to that vote, a Council majority voted down (3-5) a motion by Councilmembers Gabelich and Schipske, backed Reyes Uranga to have the private entity pay $500,000 in taxpayer costs to relocate city agencies from the city owned property and to disclose to the Council and the public the terms of the final contract before approving it.
The Feb. 10 Council-majority approved transaction was halted by the City Attorney's office after a Public Records Act request by University Park Estates homeowner and wetlands advocate Tom Marchese uncovered City Hall emails (released by the City Attorney's office and first reported by TheDistrictWeekly.com's Dave Wielenga) disclosing how senior city management had negotiated the proposed transaction.
The City Attorney's office subsequently indicated that Councilmembers had not been informed of certain "material facts" prior to voting on Feb. 10 to approve the transaction...and City Attorney Bob Shannon directed that Councilmembers first discuss the matter in closed sessions (which have taken place) before holding a public session on the matter...which is apparently now scheduled for August 4...with an "up-or-down" Council vote (re-vote) on the deal.
The Feb. 10 motion to approve the earlier deal was made by 3rd dist. Councilman Gary DeLong...who initially specified inclusion of a deed restriction limiting future use of the SE LB property to wetlands purposes [no text released].
However later in the Council meeting, city management argued against including a deed restriction at escrow, saying it might reduce the value of the property that the City could subsequently seek from the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority (which currently doesn't have the money to buy the property).
LBReport.com welcomes our readers' responses to the agendized item.
Developing...with further to follow on LBReport.com.
