South Los Angeles Redevelopment Planning Steering Committee

Transcription

1 South Los Angeles Redevelopment Planning Steering Committee Tuesday, September 02, :00-7:30 P.M. ***MINUTES*** ATTENDANCE CRA/LA Staff Present: Don Spivack, Deputy Chief of Operations Mary Nemick, Public Affairs Manager Dania Flynt, Community Affairs Specialist Jennifer Barrera, Assistant Project Manager William Chun, Project Manager Steering Committee Members Present: Joyce Perkins, Crenshaw CAC Jerry Edwards, Crenshaw CAC Maria Rutledge, Vermont/Manchester CAC Bishop Roy Petitt, Normandie 5 PAC Wanda Garcia, Western/Slauson CAC Robert Jackson, Western/Slauson CAC Kim Moore, Crenshaw/Slauson CAC Linda Ricks, Crenshaw/ Slauson CAC D.J. McCulley, Broadway/Manchester Michael Banner 1

2 Guests: Jennifer Thomas Kevin Fridlington Laura Meyers Wilma Woodhouse Theodore Thomas Dr. Jesse Beasley Griselda Gonzales Margerit Cheeseboro John Culbert Luella Baker Faisal Alserri Noel Jones II Lacy Goode Council District 8: David Roberts, CD 8 Economic Development Deputy Dennis Rodoriguez, CD 8 Deputy Welcome and Introduction Don Spivack, Acting Regional Administrator, welcomed everyone to the 4 th meeting of the South LA Redevelopment Planning Steering Committee. Self-introductions were made. The meeting agenda was distributed. Rotating Chair Selection Mr. Spivack reminded everyone that the monthly Steering Committee meeting would be chaired by CAC/PAC Chairs on a rotating basis. Laura Meyers from the Expo-University Park CAC chaired the meeting. 2

3 Approval of the Minutes Copies of the July 8, 2008 minutes were distributed for review and approval. M/S/C J. Perkins R. Pettit To approve the minutes of July 8, Motion was unanimously approved. Review: July Meeting/Project Selection Exercise Mary Nemick, CRA/LA Outreach Manager, gave a brief overview on the Project Selection Exercise that was conducted at the July meeting: Ms. Nemick explained that each committee member was asked to place two blue dots next to the most important priority of the three listed in their respective project area. The following Project Areas/Priorities included in this exercise were the following: Broadway/ Manchester Broadway/ Manchester Shopping Center Commercial Façade and Signage Program Raymond and Odessa Cox Villas Crenshaw Vision Theater Improvements and Re-opening Leimert Park Area Improvements Marlton Square Mixed Use Development 3

4 Crenshaw/ Slauson Hyde Park (former library) 54 th and Crenshaw Mixed Use Development Public Improvements for Industrial Sites Expo/ University Park Residential Rehab Programs Historic Housing Rehab Program Commercial/ Retail Attraction/ Expansion Loan Program Normandie 5 Loren Miller Park Improvements Residential Rehab Program and Residential Façade Programs Commercial Façade and Signage Program Vermont/ Manchester Bethany Square Mixed-Use Residential Rehab Program Manchester Library Site-Mixed use Western/ Slauson 60 th and Western Industrial Park Acquisition Western/Gage Gateway Project Site Residential Rehab She explained that the purpose of the exercise was to identify the consistency of the project area priorities which included selecting projects based on the following: - Eliminating blight - Creating jobs - Neighborhood and Quality of Life improvements - Site Control - Readiness 4

5 A second exercise followed the first, in which the members of the Steering Committee were asked, by the use of red dots, to identify project priorities outside of their own community. Identified priorities were: Broadway/ Manchester Broadway/ Manchester Shopping Center Raymond & Odessa Cox Villas Crenshaw Leimert Park Area Improvements Marlton Square Mixed Use Development Crenshaw/ Slauson Hyde Park (former library) Public Improvements for Industrial Sites Expo/ University Park Historic Housing Rehab Program Commercial/ Retail Attraction/ Expansion Loan Program Vermont/ Manchester Bethany Square Mixed-Use Residential Rehab Program Manchester Library Site-Mixed use Western/ Slauson Acquisition & Public Improvements Western/Gage Gateway Project Site Residential Rehab 5

6 Lengthy discussion ensued, as well as comments, questions and answers. Ms. Nemick reiterated that the purpose of this was purely an exercise to get people to starting thinking about projects outside their individual project areas. It was not a binding exercise. Mr. Spivack stated that it is very important to have these discussions because ultimately the question will be if the community wants the merger to occur. This is the purpose for having these Steering Committee meetings. Status Report on Merger Analysis Mr. Spivack indicated that a feasibility study was done that looked at whether a merger made sense from a number of perspectives. This included a fiscal analysis. As a result, staff put out a Request For Proposal (RFP) for consulting that would do the required redevelopment analysis under State law. This requires a number of steps such as an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a review of blighting conditions, and an update to the conditions of the properties on the ground. This process will assess each project area and determine if justification exists for reestablishing the eminent domain authority, and if so, under what circumstances they would be applied. The Committee was advised that at the CRA/LA Board meeting of September 18, 2008, staff will seek authority to do the required analysis, prepare the required documents and submit them to the advisory bodies and then to elected officials. It does not predetermine a solution. Analysis has to be conducted to demonstrate that conditions can be met under the law before recommendations can be made to the CRA/LA Board of Commissioner and the City Council. Ultimately it will be the decision of the CRA/LA Board and City Council whether or not to approve a merger. Discussion ensued. 6

7 A question was asked how the analysis would be presented to the entire community. Mr. Spivack responded that results of the analysis would be presented to the community at town hall meetings. Copies of the draft Board Memo for the September 18 CRA/LA Board meeting were distributed for review and discussion. Billy Chun, CRA Project Manager, stated that there have been many discussions at the Steering Committee regarding process, feasibility and funding of merger. However, in order to move to the next steps we must obtain direction from the CRA/LA Board and City Council. The draft board memo allows the process to be streamlined. It would make many activities such as authority to transmit documents ministerial, thus saving time in the overall process. Joyce Perkins requested that staff provide to the committee an outline that shows what steps are required, according to the process that is in place and how it would be streamlined. Mr. Spivack responded that this would be a good idea. It was pointed out that at some strategic point the larger community must be brought in to inform them of the merger and get the input. Dave Roberts, Deputy, CD8, stated that the Council wants to ensure that the current steering committee stays in place and that large town hall meetings be held to get wider community support. Questions arose as to what financial benefit the merger would provide to the project areas, if any? Mr. Spivack clarified that the act of merging the projects, in and of itself, would not necessarily change the tax increment generated in any given project area. However, the collection of all the project areas into a larger unit would substantially reduce the perceived risk that is involved in issuing bonds and the additional coverage that 7

8 needs to be set aside to issue bonds which is expected to increase the bonding capacity by initially $14.5 million. Discussion continued. M/S/C J. Perkins R. Petitt Next Meeting The Steering Committee support the statement that there is general consensus that the proposed plan merger makes sense from a financial perspective. Vote Yes 7 No 5 Motion was approved. The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 7,