L.A. City Council may transfer up to $1.03 billion in redevelopment funds out of state lawmakers' hands [Updated]

Worried that state officials will soon sign off on Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to shutter redevelopment agencies, the Los Angeles City Council is scheduled Tuesday to move as much as $1.3 billion in redevelopment funds out of the hands of state lawmakers.

[Updated, 5:10 p.m.: A previous version of this post said the council might transfer up to $1.3 billion.]

On the same day Los Angeles voters go to the polls for seven open council seats, the council is scheduled to consider a series of financial commitments, property transfers, housing loans and consulting contracts favored by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's appointees at the Community Redevelopment Agency.

Times' Data Desk: How is your redevelopment agency spending money?

The meeting starts at 10:15 a.m. and will feature a joint session with Villaraigosa's redevelopment appointees. The hastily scheduled meeting irked Councilwoman Jan Perry, who said it was "illogical" to take up the proposals on a day that many of her colleagues are busy thinking about their own campaigns.

"One half of the City Council is up for reelection. This is a massive issue that we're about to vote on, and it merits our full attention," she said.

Supporters of the redevelopment agency say it should be allowed to continue its mission of providing much-needed housing and amenities to low-income neighborhoods, including South Los Angeles and Boyle Heights.

Critics contend too many redevelopment projects are financial giveaways to politically well-connected businesses, depriving schools and hospitals across the state of scarce tax revenue.

The redevelopment board voted weeks ago to recommend the council tie up $930 million for scores of projects planned by the agency over the next five years.

Such a move would preserve $35,000 available for security cameras in Reseda, $1.6 million for the renovation of a shopping center in North Hollywood and $50 million for a proposed skyscraper on Grand Avenue in downtown Los Angeles, according to a report submitted Monday to the council.

Redevelopment officials worked furiously over the weekend to stage a second shift of funds. At 8 a.m. Monday, the redevelopment board agreed to allocate $103 million, including loans for affordable housing projects and an extension of existing contracts with up to 19 law firms.

David Bloom, who was hired as the agency’s new public relations consultant at Monday’s emergency board meeting, defended the board's actions, saying it felt it needed to move quickly.

“We’re trying to make sure the city can continue to do the things it wants to do in an appropriate fashion for the communities that it made commitments to,” he said.

RELATED:

Redevelopment agencies shortchanged California schools $40 million

California cities launch ad campaign to protect redevelopment agencies

Affordable-housing advocates push plan to preserve tax money for redevelopment

-- David Zahniser at Los Angeles City Hall

Comments

[DexterFox]

$50 Million for a Grand Avenue Skyscraper? Isn't that pretty close to the City's budget deficit this year?

[Cheese_Wonton]

LA is the poster child for eliminating RDA's. The idea was a good one, but they have become an accountability free slush fund for politicians to reward their pets, and campaign contributors, with the publics money. This has to stop as soon as possible.

[arty]

I hope Mayor Villaraigosa and his cronies get charged with missappropiation of funds. That is money that could be used to fund disability programs and fix our budget crisis. If there is no state there is not city.

[anon]

Hope everyone involved with this misappropriation of funds is put behind bars.

[nikki di palma]

how can government workers who've never worked in the real world make real world investment deals to "redevelop" a community? Look what they've done to my neighborhood, the cement block of franchise stores, the NoHo Gateway??? That money could have been spent to build more arts centers. but oh yeah, they don't know our neighborhood and what we do here as they sit in their castle. Good bye and good riddance.

[Scam City]

Why not stop taking this money from the tax payers and then nobody gets a dime and the tax payer has more money in their pocket.

[JustCause]

I feel that 50 mil for a skyscraper is crazy, but I've been working in LA for the last 20 years and have noticed that the city is really changing....it doesn't look like the dangerous city of the 80's and 90's. South LA and parts of the Eastside are very nice and welcoming. I recall that I use to hate going to any part of downtown after dark and now it's a place that I'll drive 20 miles into for dinner with my family. I agree that we should monitor RDA, but they have made the city a much nicer place. I feel that if redevelopment is stopped we will see the city fall back to slum conditions in area that have been redeveloped. I took my father to Langers across from Mc Arthur Park and he couldn’t believe the transformation of the park since the 90's. I recall reading that the park was an RDA project. I would like to see RDA continue, but closely monitored. It's a cycle that will eliminate jobs, spike up crime and have a negative effect on the quality of life of the people.

[ljl]

I hope the transfer goes smooth!!! Jerry, you lied to us! At least Meg was up front about what she was going to do....

The City needs this money to help us stay afloat...

[Diana]

Let's investigate CRA like the one done with LACCs. I recall seeing some CRA funds used for a program where the person resided in San Gabriel. Looking further into the name of the person, I found her sitting on a commission. It's scandalous and someone needs to audit, investigate all contracts issued through CRA because it is corrupt. Why do you think Cecilia Estolano resigned from CRA?

[Jeffrey]

They are trying to shield the money away from the schools and today city council is making a haste decision for projects this city does not need. 1.3 billion would definitely help our kids.

[anon]

Help defeat all the incumbents who have perpetrated this CRA misappropriation of funds. Today is election day. Get rid of LaBonge, Huizar, Cardenas, Wesson and the wannabe Englander. Make your vote count for clean government.

[surfdogh2o]

Pork barrel politics at its best.
I will never vote to help bail LA out of its financial mess as I will assume that they have plenty if they are keeping these RDA funds for pet projects.

Fiscal crisis? What crisis?

[davidpaul]

THIS IS FUNNY...19 contracts to law firms...and you wonder why the city is bankrupt...19 law firms are picking the taxpayers pockets...and of course the city council errand boys run to make sure these contracts are covered...good ole boy system triumphs again...what a joke!

[Greg Maragos]

Is this legal? Can the state sue? We may yet see an unprecedented wave of lawsuits between state and local governments.

What fun. It's a lawyer's wet dream come true.

[whatever]

This money should go back to the state; I support Gov. Brown ideas. Too bad our city "leaders" are still trying to do things as usual, instead of thinking about what's best for the city residents. A Grand Ave. skyscraper? How is it helping us? It definitely helps the contractors.

[diaper rash]

This is our local money that we spend gradually over time as we see fit without much public scrutiny or fanfare. When you are a decision maker in awarding government contracts you are popular. Some weeks you cannot accept every invitation from someone asking to treat you to lunch - you have to save some room for dinner.
Now the State of California is poised to enact a swift reduction in your popularity rating. No more local money for local contracts - you find yourself eating lunch alone at Yoshinoya.
We can't let the state swoop in and take over decision making on how these funds are spent. So we do the only thing we can to keep it away from them.
We commit everything we have. Right now. We stay up all night signing contracts until our fingers are numb. We sign until our vision is blurry and we can't even read what we are signing. We didn't want to do it this way, but at least we kept it away from the state. Because that is the priority. Isn't it?
We may have entered into a legal contract to excavate a deep pit at a cost of $50 million. Also, we may have entered into a separate legal contract for that deep pit to be filled in and graded at a cost of $50 million. At least we have earned the admiration and respect of the city for keeping it local.

[James Andrews]

So fun to watch Democrats from different levels of government scramble and fight over other people's money. They are is such a hurry to spend they don't care what it is for. Then they expect us to vote for higher taxes to keep it coming in. I think I will vote NO.

[diaper rash]

The redevelopment agency is about to be put out of business. So they are furiously writing checks and signing contracts to empty the bank account.
The commissioners are in a panic. We don't want any one of the commissioners to give themselves a stroke. They are not fooling anyone-so why the big act?

There is a less exhausting way for them to achieve the desired result.
The commissioners should each submit their resignation effective 8am tomorrow. Tonight at 5:30pm take one last vote. Take the total amount of money in the bank account. Divide it by the number of commissioners. Vote that amount as a retirement bonus to each commissioner. Mission accomplished.

[diaper rash]

I was always confused about how the redevelopment agency operates to improve our neighborhoods and provide amenities to our communities.
I think I just had that AH-HA moment. Now I understand.

Now I understand how all the beneficial results are realized. It is very simple.

They use eminent domain to force private landowners to sell their properties and use public money to pay for it. They hold the property and allow some time to pass. Then they give the property to their friends.

[Tralfaz]

Crediting the CRA with the revitalization of Hollywood would be like crediting Italy for the Allies' victory in WWII.