The Alameda County Redevelopment Successor Agency Oversight Board voted on Wednesday to revise the Long Range Property Management Plan (LRPMP) so that a public use (e.g. a town square) will be considered for the Daughtrey’s site as the complicated process of wrapping up the affairs of over 400 redevelopment agencies in California continues. I previously wrote about the importance of the LRPMP in enabling our community to pursue a town square for the site.
The Successor Agency will change the designated “Recommended Intended Use Action” for the Daughtrey’s Building site in the LRPMP that will be forwarded to the State of California Department of Finance from “Transfer to County and sell for development” to “Transfer to County and sell for development or retain.”
This means that we can continue to develop a plan for a town square, while Alameda County continues pursuing a development deal for the Daughtrey’s building.
There was some timely news about the Alameda County Successor Agency’s LRPMP at today’s meeting that points to the challenges ahead for any development at the Daughtrey’s site because of the State of California’s role in redevelopment dissolution.
In a February 26, 2014 letter to the Successor Agency, the Department of Finance rejected the “governmental purpose property” classification of two parcels, the Lorenzo Theater in San Lorenzo and a parcel behind the Ice Creamery in Castro Valley intended for the shared parking project:
“The development of a parking lot in conjunction with Property 6 [the Daughtrey’s building](the renovation of a retail/commercial building does not meet criteria of a governmental purpose property as defined in [Health and Safety Code] section 34181(a).”
Here is the pertinent part of the California Health and Safety Code: “The oversight board shall direct the successor agency to do all of the following: (a) Dispose of all assets and properties of the former redevelopment agency; provided, however, that the oversight board may instead direct the successor agency to transfer ownership of those assets that were constructed and used for a governmental purpose, such as roads, school buildings, parks, police and fire stations, libraries, and local agency administrative buildings, to the appropriate public jurisdiction pursuant to any existing agreements relating to the construction or use of such an asset.”
The Successor Agency and Oversight Board will now need to explore what options they have for the Lorenzo Theater and the Castro Valley parcel that was part of the shared parking plan.
California’s break up with redevelopment has been messy and riddled with confusing legislation that has gone through multiple revisions. The Department of Finance’s role in making decisions about the disposal of properties in communities throughout California has resulted in lots of litigation.
Senate Bill 1129, introduced by Darrell Steinberg, President pro Tem of the California Senate, was briefly mentioned at the Oversight Board meeting. If the bill becomes law, it would limit the cost associated with retaining a redevelopment property for a public use by not requiring a “compensation agreement,” the mechanism that transfers the proceeds of the sale of a property to the “taxing entities” that are currently entitled to the proceeds under redevelopment dissolution.