Laserfiche WebLink
<br />., <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Cooper <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br />January 15, 19B2 <br /> <br />7. The Redevelopment Plan. enacted origina:1tly in 1973 <br />requires "citizen participation. . .to insure that the Santa <br />Ana Redevelopment Project is a success". It provides that <br />"legitimate citizen interest and participation" be invited and <br />used. These mandates of the Plan cannot be met by the process <br />that has taken place. <br /> <br />B. The Plan (and condemnation law) not only mandates <br />a'greater showing of "necessity" to take the property than has <br />been evidenced, it also requires a showing that ". . . it cannot <br />be acquired by other means". Yet, to date, no specific offer <br />has been made to Sombrero Street for its interest. It cannot <br />be said the property cannot be acquired by other means. <br /> <br />9. A further deficiency of the process in which we are <br />involved relates to the nature of the proposed project. As <br />originally conceived and as approved by the Agency, it envisioned <br />a more modest 18,000 sq. ft. structure. This project did not <br />require the interests of Sombrero Street be taken. By what means <br />has the project now blossomed to emcompass the entire city block? <br />It appears that the Agency's previous approval has been disregarded <br />or changed without public or Agency involvement. I conclude, <br />procedural safeguards have been by-passed in expanding the scope <br />of project. ' <br /> <br />10. The prior approvals and "exclusive right to nego- <br />tiate" was originally given to Alan Fainberg for a six month <br />period. That period expired without reaching any agreement. <br />Nonetheless, we are informed, more than a month later, without <br />public hearing or involvement, a new six month exclusive right <br />was improperly given. That period has now expired with no <br />contract being agreed upon. Yet negotiations continue, exclusively <br />with the developer and without opportunity for other developers <br />to be heard. <br /> <br />11. In fact, a totally different entity (other than <br />Fainberg) is now the developer. By what provision can the <br />original developer, without Agency involvement or public hearing, <br />transfer expired rights to a separate person or entity and thereby <br />claim the legal and procedural legitimacy necessary to justify <br />prejudicing not only the valuable rights of Sombrero Street, but <br />also those of the public, to offer alternative proposals and <br />projects for the location. <br /> <br />, <br />