This clip is short but meaningful. Claiming East & West Fullerton are “blighted”, Councilman Dick Jones and the Redevelopment Agency wants to take “money” from the schools, police and fire departments, and use it to build “municipal auditoriums, affordable housing, and even homes.” Of course none of this is about good ol’ Dick. He’s doin’ jes fine up on the hill. Enjoy!
About twenty years ago, the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency bought a few old houses, and condemned a perfectly good commercial building from long-time prominent Fullerton attorney William Chaffee. The City kicked everyone out and gave the prime land on the 100 block of W. Wilshire Ave in downtown to a Pasadena development group named Howard /Platz. All this done under the condition that H/P build retail space and apartments on top.
The developer built the apartments over retail, took its fees and profit along the way. But the project couldn’t lease up for the amounts that the developer and the City had promised each other, so eventually the property was taken over by Lenders. It was then sold for a fraction of what the City and H/P had invested because of the the dire market conditions and the complication that the project included a City parking structure. The new company which bought it lowered the rents and it eventually filled it up with tenants because of reduced rental prices and the City’s concession that the retail space was no longer required to be tax generating.
That was good for a few renters for a short time but bad for the rest of the property owners in downtown because this glut of space forced down rental rates. It was also bad news for the City because the tax revenues that the developer had “promised” to generate never materialized.
The lesson; When government gets involved in the development business, it’s bad for everyone except for a select few who take a direct benefit and the well paid redevelopment bureaucrats.
2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
Property: 626 & 700 S. Euclid Street
Agency Negotiator: Rob Zur Schmiede
Negotiating Parties: Paul Kott, Pierre J. Nicolas Trust
Under Negotiations: Price and terms
Affordable housing, like politics apparently makes for strange bedfellows. Take the case of Euclid Commons, a proposed affordable housing site that the City wants to buy. The agent for the owner is none other than Paul Kott, an Anaheim realtor and apparently a giant NIMBY, to boot.
About three years ago the City of Anaheim proposed a housing development for disabled folks near Kott’s offices on Lincoln Avenue, a pretty worthy goal you would think. But guess who marshaled neighborhood opposition that caused the city council back down? That’s right, Paul Kott.
Lest anyone think we make this stuff up, we thoughtfully provide a link to the LA Times article from 2006, here.
And speaking of money, here’s the money quote:
“Residents of the neighborhood, called Westmont, said a letter from real estate agent Paul Kott alerted them to the city’s plans for the vacant lot at Wilshire Avenue and Pearl Street. Kott, whose office is a few hundred yards from the site, wrote in his letter that “parolees, child molesters and mentally ill” could soon live nearby.”
Hey, Fullerton CC, nice guys you want to do business with!
Yesterday we ran a post on the duplicitous way the City started the ball rolling behind closed doors on a big housing project that promises CEQA impacts on its neighbors. In fact decisions are already being taken that should have been done under the illumination of a public hearing.
The project even has a name, “Euclid Commons” that makes us wish to make a quick pit stop at the West Harbor Alley Improvement Project vomitorium. A couple of comments provided descriptions of what was being proposed that seemed to differ considerably and so we provide la tabula rasa for our Friends to chime in and see if any clarifications are forthcoming.
The issue of starting negotiations is being addressed tonight (Aug 4th) behind closed doors since the public can’t be trusted to even know that a project is now officially (if secretly) sanctioned by the City Council. There will be “reporting out” but no public comment. Really, what have they got to hide?
The other day I took my elementary-age children to Cafe West for a cool drink, and found this postcard on the counter:
The triptych above seems to reflect a strategy all too common in the city:
- Phase #1: tear out trees (and put in a subsidized fire line for the “night clubs”)
- Phase #2: fill holes with temporary asphalt
- Phase #3: ask questions later
To most of us, this would seem a bit like putting the cart before the horse, but one has to wonder if the RDA sees it that way.
What’s the mystery here? For goodness sake, this is just an alleyway, all they’ve done is yank out a few trees! What kind of “design” is required here? Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill!
My own kids provided some helpful suggestions as to what to do with the freshly vacated space in the alley. One of them thought a modern sculpture would be appropriate, while the other mused that perhaps another luxury apartment complex could be squeezed into that tiny space. Hey, where there’s a will, there’s a way.
However, given Fullerton’s recent trend of rolling out the red carpet to the bar scene, perhaps a European-styled “pissoir” could not only provide a visually attractive option, but one that’s functional as well.
True, a few fumes may greet the occasional pedestrian walking through the alley, but this would be one project the RDA could actually claim where form follows function.
This triptych seemed to reflect a strategy all too common in the city:
We read in the LA Times this morning a story about Redevelopment by Jessica Garrison. It was a kind of weird hybrid about State budget raids on Redevelopment agencies and about how the California Redevelopment Association had paid to produce a series of TV shows touting the wonders of redevelopment and hosted by Huell Howser click here for story .
We have always considered Howser something of a menace to culture and intelligent television with his dopey drawl, his inability to ask an insightful question, his perpetual overstatement of the obvious, and his complete disregard for whatever his “guests” happen to be saying. The transfiguration of the mundane into the near metaphysical (hey Louie, you gotta get a picture of this bubblin’ mud hole!) is another annoying part of his tiresome schtick. But on balance he seemed to be fairly innocuous, little kids who didn’t know any better liked him, and we remember with fondness his attempt to save the Long Beach Naval Shipyard facilities.
According to Garrison’s article Howser has now been bought and paid for by the Redevelopment lobby, who undoubtedly saw an opportunity to co-opt a voice for preservation and employ it for themselves. Howser should be ashamed of himself for getting into bed with the same greedy, self-interested thieves who have done inestimable harm to the historic built environment in California. For every historic building it has saved (remuddled, more likely) redevelopment has deployed its bulldozers against a hundred others.
Well, Huell has got his thirty pieces of silver. But as the article points out, the State’s raid on Redevelopment coffers may well spell the end for many Redevelopment agencies. Let’s hope so. And let’s make sure to boycott Howser’s puff piece love notes to the CRA.
What associations and organizations does the City of Fullerton support financially that should be cut before cutting a librarian, a police officer or a life guard? How much money does the city spend every year on contracts with lobbyists?
- Townsend Public Affairs
- Smith Dawson & Andrews
- Strategic Solutions
- Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee
Isn’t it time to examine some of these relationships and analyze their effectiveness?
Friends, we receive thought-provoking e-mails from time to time, and like the good Friends that we are, we like to share them with you.
We recently received an e-mail from Jeff Oderman, an attorney with the firm of Rutan & Tucker. Mr. Oderman happens to be the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency’s lawyer, and we’ve been pretty diligent about ripping the bandage off this suppurating wound; and one of our more assertive Harpoons even took a poke at him here. We’re not sure if Oderman is complaining about that particular post, or about our whole effort here at FFFF. Clarity of expression doesn’t appear to be a prerequisite for employment at R & T. In either case, Jeff seems none too happy.
Anyway, from Mr. Oderman:
—– Forwarded Message —-
From:“Oderman, Jeff” <joderman@rutan.com>
To:Fullertons Future <info@friendsforfullertonsfuture.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 5:41:27 AM
Subject:RE: [Friends For Fullerton’s Future] Jeff Oderman: The High Price of Bad Advice
You should check your facts before you publish. You’re entitled to your own opinions, of course, but there is almost not a single truthful factual statement in the entire blog.
Jeffrey M. Oderman
Rutan & Tucker, LLP
611 Anton Boulevard, 14th Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
714-641-3441 Direct
714-546-9035 Fax
joderman@rutan.com
www.rutan.com
We’re entitled to our own opinions? Well, Hell, Jeff, that’s mighty big of you. And we thank the boys at the Constitutional Convention, too.
But: “Almost not a single truthful factual statement in the entire blog.” Really? Almost everything is either a lie or wrong? Or both? Hoo Boy! Them’s fightin’ words.
As a firmly attached barnacle on the bottom of the SS Fullerton Redevelopment Agency, Oderman has a pretty sweet gig going, with zero accountability, and we’re pretty sure he wants to keep it that way. Good revenue for the firm and not much real work. But c’mon Jeff, you’re not going to protect your little sinecure by riling up the Friends.
Anyway, in the spirit of self-improvement and public information we have invited Mr. Oderman to favor us with “truthful and factual” corrections to any of our posts to which he objects. We promise to publish anything he sends our way. See, unlike the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency and its minions, we want open and unfettered dialogue – a discussion where the truth will out, and the political flacks and self-interested bureaucrats don’t always have the last, incompetent, and irresponsible word.
We also figure that the more they say the more holes they punch into the bottom of their leaky tub.
Some people are determined to talk. They just can’t help it. They believe that the more stuff they say the more informed they appear. Even if it’s just babble to the rest of us.
Take our own Councilman Dick Jones. If we didn’t mine so much pure gold out of this bonehead’s blathering we really would beg him just to shut up – if only to soothe our agitated synapses.
One of his favorite reasons for promoting Redevelopment expansion is that the money can be used to satisfy low-income housing mandates, imposed by the evil bastards in Sacramento, or Karakhastan, or Tanganyisha, or whatever mythical countries exist in his febrile imagination.
The fact is that housing objectives come from SCAG – the Southern California Association of Governments – a bureaucratic local government consortium made up of people like Jones and guided by public employees. The housing targets, by income classification, are contained in the RHNA (pronounced “reena”) – the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, and are divvied up among local jurisdictions. These numbers are merely “goals,” not mandates. The whole thing is a bureaucratic paper chase and hardly anybody takes it seriously except far lefties.
Which brings us to the point of this post. We wonder what Jones’ Republican backers like Ed Royce and Dick Ackerman think about Jones actively promoting the quasi-socialist RHNA objectives in Fullerton. He is sounding more and more like Sharon Kennedy with each passing meeting. So we have to wonder who’s coaching him on housing issues (well, no we really don’t).
Finally, Jones doesn’t talk about the real mandate; it comes from Redevelopment law itself: the 20% property tax increment set-aside for “affordable” housing, a requirement created to help compensate when city planners and pols rip up lower income neighborhoods to gentrify them. The new expansion area includes little if any residential housing, so no housing stock is going to be displaced. But sooner or later that 20% set aside will start to accrue, and it will have to be used somewhere in Fullerton.
Somewhere in Fullerton. But not in Dick’s zero sub-prime neighborhood in the hills, you can bet the family farm on that. The buck will certainly stop there.
Watch Dick Jones question Redevelopment Director Rob Zur Schmiede about the availability of tax increment monies in the proposed extension area. Zur Schmiede responds that because of the merger with an existing area money would be available “immediately.” And Jones is off to the Camp Town races, perhaps not realizing that his Redevelopment director was only talking about existing funds – not new property tax increment. All he heard was “immediately.” So he sits up, pleased as punch, like he had just discovered radium. Uh–mmediately! Well, Land ‘o Goshen! You cain’t hardly beat uh-mmediate! Instant gratification – a predictable desire in a child; embarrassing in a septuagenarian.
The reality is that even if the Redevelopment extension survives a legal challenge, the depressed real estate market and property tax re-assessments will likely create a flat or even a negative increment for the near to mid-term future within the amendment area. This means that any Redevelopment funded projects here would have to dip into the also diminishing increment in the pre-existing project area. So why doesn’t Jones grasp this? Because the Redevelopment Agency has arrived upon the scene to cure all that ails us. HOT DAMN! IMMEDIATELY!
Is this really the guy we want making this decisions for us?