FFFF supports causes that promote intelligent, responsible and accountable government in Fullerton and Orange County
Category: Redevelopment
Redevelopment is Government removing existing homes, businesses, and other buildings and replacing them with something different. The history of redevelopment in Fullerton has lead to a long string of ugly, deteriorating buildings and outright failure.
Just jotted this comment on another post but it seems to serve as a short, stand alone essay on Redevelopment. So we share it below:
The entire premise behind Redevelopment is that private enterprise doesn’t work – as evidenced in blight. They love to latch on to the concept of property being “under utilized” meaning that it’s not pulling its weight to generate sales tax revenue to pay for staff salaries and benefits! Rather than using code enforcement to clean up real problems they prefer to divert property tax revenue and play developer.
I’m not sure that the dead hand is a good metaphor. Judging by the unaccountable boondogglery in Fullerton over the years that has done real damage to the cityscape I’m inclined to think along the more active lines of “living dead” planning/design and “zombie” land use concepts.
The Charge to Clean Up Fullerton; or, A Meeting of Redevelopment Staff
I always love it when Redevelopment proponents point to the existence of pawn shops, etc. as evidence of a malfunctioning economic system. What they ignore are the cheap rents that serve as an incubator to small businesses, especially those created by young entrepreneurs. Look at the history of the SoCo abomination; Santa Fe was a “run down” street by Redevelopment standards and yet Sean Francis used an old, beat-up building shell across from an industrial use to create a vibrant business. It was later that the City tagged along and started with the lame signs and laughable paving – immediately robbing the place of any authenticity.
For some reason the Redevelopment hacklings just can’t understand the concept of business cycles and one very simple fact of business: one man’s difficulty is another man’s opportunity.
FFFF’s seasoned veteran Attorney Bob Ferguson (6-0 record vs. redevelopment scams) knows a blight scam when he sees it, and is relishing the idea of bringing the redevelopment expansion under the judicial microscope. Like a quack doctor intentionally trumping up a diagnosis to jack up his fees, the redevelopment agency’s legal council Jeff Oderman with Rutan & Tucker fabricates blight that doesn’t exist at $400 per hour. Judges will see through this charade, just as they have with many other cities Ferguson has challenged.
One property owner in the affected area said it best–“I’m offended that the City has declared my property blighted, and I just now found out about it. Tell me how it’s blighted and I’ll fix it myself!”
The process limps forward towards a legal battle, with Shawn Nelson and Sharon Quirk in opposition. At least Nelson and Quirk respect the law that they have sworn to uphold.
A classic example of how the redevelopment agency casts a dead hand on parts of our city can be seen at the Northeast corner of Brookhurst & Orangethorpe. A firm that I know has plans to purchase the properties from 6 different owners and assemble the 8 acres for a new development. They have the cash, the experience, the patience, and the price is right.
Now, however, the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency proposes to include this property into its expanded area. The owners are unwilling to sell now because they think the agency will pay more later than the private firm will pay now–which may be true.
In addition, if the agency does a “friendly eminent domain” scam, the owners get tax advantages the private company cannot offer. Of course, the eminent domain may be unfriendly if the agency won’t pay what the owners’ want.
Then, having assembled the parcels, the agency will sell at a discount–or give the land away–to a politically connected developer who will build what the RDA staff wants. Not what the market demands, but what the bureaucrats want.
This kind of micromanaging of property is what the RDA is all about. Instead of letting the market work on its own, the bureaucrats and politicians intervene. Instead of allowing willing sellers and willing buyers to create a privately-funded project–they want to use your tax dollars.
Instead of letting private enterprises’ make a profit–and of course risk a loss–they want to socialize the whole development. This approached has failed time after time.
Apparently, the Redevelopment staff got the word out to those already receiving City funds to get behind this redevelopment expansion if you want to score brownie points and maybe a little more dinero.
Speakers at Tuesday’s hearing in favor of the expansion included Jim Ranii of the Museum Board. Of course, the Museum is not blighted (is it, Jim?) and is not eligible for any funding by expanding the RDA. Muckenthaler Director Zoot Velasco talked of the “hidden blight” in Southwest Fullerton. Let’s hope its not so well hidden when it’s challenged in court. And, Zoot, the Muck cannot receive any future loot, so why allow yourself to be used by RDA staff? Then the folks from OCCLA who want grafitti removal (714-738-3108) and code enforcement (they don’t need redevelopment for either), and the Chamber of Commerce director Terresa Harvey, begging for hand outs for her fellow board members like Scott Dowds (who also spoke in favor). And lastly let’s not forget old Louis Kuntz Sr., who supported the expansion as well. Not surprising, since his son Louis Jr. and the Morgan Company who already got an $18 million public gift (including the gift of a public street–100 block East Whiting) from the Agency for his downtown apartment complex…. maybe there are some more profitable projects looming for him in the expanded area.
Now you know what happened to E. Whiting Ave.
Of course, their pleas had nothing to do with blight. In order to legally declare an area “redevelopment” the area must be blighted.
The process limps forward towards a legal battle, with Shawn Nelson and Sharon Quirk in opposition. At least Nelson and Quirk respect the law that they have sworn to uphold. Stay tuned.
Fullerton residents owe Councilwoman Sharon Quirk a big thank you for her stellar performance at last night’s City Council meeting. Quirk displayed responsible leadership and accountability to the citizens of Fullerton. Furthermore, she made a decision that saved Fullerton taxpayers $6 million while taking the leadership role in quashing the controversial McDonald’s move.
The best part of the night was that she was humble enough to admit error; she had previously supported McD’s McMove, but she realized that move was detrimental to Fullerton taxpayers and she had the courage to stand on principle.
Additionally, she tried to save the city/agency plenty more by voting against the RDA’s bogus blight findings that it is sure to lose in court.
We are proud to have Sharon Quirk as a Friend For Fullerton’s Future.
Residents witnessed another rousing victory for FFFF last night as Councilwoman Sharon Quirk wisely reversed direction on Fullerton’s famous $6 million dollar burger deal that would give away a brand new McDonald’s restaurant at taxpayers’ expense. Pam Keller sensed the inevitable failure of this project and also changed course, sending this turkey down in a 4-1 vote. Nelson and Jones had it right from the beginning, but Bankhead rode this one all the way to the grave.
No thanks, we're not hungry anymore
Now that the taxpayer-funded McDonald’s move is dead, there isn’t much hope for the massive Fox Block redevelopment scheme – and that’s fine by us. The Fox Block had little to do with the popular restoration of the historic Fox Theatre and there was plenty of doubt the that the block would be financially viable even with millions in taxpayer subsidies. Throw in a little public deception about the height of the buildings, and it’s clear that this project needed to be flushed.
Even if you don’t approve of our approach here at FFFF, it’s hard to deny positive results. It’s good to see our representatives fix bad decisions and move forward. We know it’s tough to admit when you are wrong, but that’s part of responsible governance. Thank you, Quirk and Keller, for doing the right thing.
Fans of Evita will remember these lyrics: “When the money keeps rolling in, you don’t ask how. Think of all the people guaranteed a good time, now!”
Well, a lot of people at Rutan and Tucker Law firm have made plenty $$$ off Fullerton taxpayers, especially its redevelopment attorney Jeff Oderman.
Oderman has a record of loyalty to city staff and staff-directed projects, even if it means bamboozling the council (acting as redevelopment agency). Take the City Lights low-income housing project on East Commonwealth (next to the Old Post Office). In 1997 the Agency-assigned developer Caleb Nelson (who was living out of his car) disappeared. The whole deal should have ben sent back to the Council for reconsideration. A request-for-proposal should have been issued to give developers an equal opportunity.
Instead, LA developer Ajit Mithaiwala appears from nowhere to take over the project. Then-RDA Director Chaplupsky starts dealing with Ajit, until council members Norby, Sa and Jones start wondering aloud– “where did this developer come from?” Oderman claimed Ajit was now the developer. Not true, Jeff! Despite demands from the council majority, no document was ever produced showing that Mithaiwala had ever been legally assigned the project. His shoddy construction of LA projects was also a concern.
voila, it's that simple
The council saw past Oderman’s bad advice and voted to end the project. Then, Mithaiwala threatened to sue Dick Jones personally for derogatory comments he made about future tenants. Jones got no protection from Oderman and instead Jones was pressured to change his vote. He did, and the project went through.
In 1999 the City started a breach-of-contract suit against Southwest Engineering, Inc. for non-performance on the Basque Yard remodel. It turned out that Southwest had used Rutan and Tucker to defend itself against a similar suit with another city. For a firm to represent both parties in a lawsuit–even if not the same case–is a serious question of legal ethics. Yet Oderman never told the council, who found out about it from a third source–when it was too late to change lawyers.
Oderman then recommends the City settle with the non-performing contractor, paying Southwest over $1 million.
Now Oderman is giving the council/agency the same bad advice on blight in the proposed expanded redevelopment area. Its passage will lead to at least two legal challenges on the bogus blight findings. County Counsel Attorney James Harman and FFFF’s attorney Bob Ferguson have stated convincingly and repeatedly why the blight findings fail legal muster.
Similar blight findings in many other cities–including Upland, Mammoth Lakes, Diamond Bar, Murietta, Arcadia and Glendora–have been thrown out by the courts. Fullerton’s may well be headed in that direction. Has Oderman cautioned the council about the legal risks? Or is he there to provide cover for the staff and the consultants?
But, what does Oderman care? A lengthy lawsuit only adds to his hourly billings ($400/hr. adds up pretty fast). Win or lose, he’ll still be paid. If Oderman is really so confident about winning the long legal blight fight ahead, then pay him on a contingency!
Please, City Council–hire a lawyer to represent you–not defend staff boondoggles. Until then, the money keeps rolling in for Rutan and Tucker! $400 per hour for 15 years of bad advice.
At a recent Fox Block community workshop, the Redevelopment Agency made every attempt to direct public discussion away from the height and scale of the proposed commercial structure. The agency even went so far as to not show any elevational drawings, although they did pepper the room with 1st and 2nd floor plans. Even the blunt question of “how many floors will it be?” was answered with reassuring answer “We don’t know, we’ll figure that out later”.
Well Friends, we have discovered the elusive drawing in Arteco’s proposal that was submitted last year. This is what the audience should have been shown:
Click to enlarge - 68 feet of glorious redevelopment
Why didn’t the public get to see this important drawing at the meeting? There were plenty of concerned neighbors at the meeting who would have loved to see what their neighborhood will look like should this project be completed.
After the nasty battle over the height of the Amerige Court boondoggle, don’t you think they would bring this issue into the light at the very beginning? Why can’t Arteco Partners and the Redevelopment Agency be honest with the citizens of Fullerton?
Ever since the City of Fullerton climbed aboard the “Save the Fox” bandwagon, something was just plain wrong. Somehow the redevelopment bureaucrats inculcated into the public mindset the story that the only way the Fox could be “saved” was by appending it to another massive downtown housing project. To facilitate the latter the city had to relocate a fast food franchise; to accomplish that they had to buy up property on Pomona Ave. at exorbitant prices.
And so the initial make work myth has created a cascade of expensive, almost comical decisions by the city council.
Why was the linkage between the Fox and a new project a quote “myth”? Let’s apply some common sense to the issue. It was assumed (correctly) that the theater was going to require massive subsidy to restore and to operate; but somehow the city believed this loss could be rolled into a larger, profitable project by some private developer, or to be more precise, the city staff believed they could sell this bag of magic beans to the public. Three city council members (Don Bankhead, Pam Keller and Sharon Quirk) are still waiting for the beanstalk to grow.
magic beans only grow in Fullerton
There is no logical connection between restoring the Fox and the development of any new project! The fact is that whoever developed this “project” will receive massive subsidies from the Redevelopment Agency which will cover the cost of the Fox, developers do not do anything for free.
And so why doesn’t the city at least be honest: come out and acknowledge the cost of restoring and operating the Fox-and if it is deemed a worthy municipal value grant the money directly to saving the Fox.Or better yet why not let the people vote on weather or not to create a permanent Fox restoration and operations budget? Honesty and transparency. Two other civic values.
Dick Jones can’t seem to understand that it is ILLEGAL to expand Redevelopment for the bogus reasons he babbles about. “Blight” must exist in order to legally expand Redevelopment, and it doesn’t exist. This clip is 7 minutes long, but it’s well worth the watch.
