Plan for ‘surplus land’ is ill-advised

Re “Beverly Hills declares five acres as ‘surplus land,’” Feb. 2 issue

Thanks to the Beverly Press for covering the Beverly Hills City Council’s actions relating to the largest, most valuable parcel of city-owned land, about five acres, in the Entertainment Business District.

Despite misleading wording of an agenda item placed on the consent calendar instead of the hearing calendar, some residents learned of the council’s desire to dispose of the property by lease or sale, even though residents have insisted for decades that the property be held for city use.

As explained, under the government code, in order for the city to begin negotiations for the sale or lease of the property, a declaration must to be made by the council that the land is “surplus,” meaning that it is not needed for city use. However, the land cannot legally be considered “surplus” or not needed for city use under the government code, because the property is presently being used as a city dog park [and a] public works facility. City property is even being stored within the charming streamline modern building on the property which city officials like to refer to as “vacant.”

Similarly, the property cannot be legally considered “surplus” under the government code because it has been represented that any development of the land will incorporate the city dog park and public works facility.  Despite the fact that the land is being used and is needed for city use, the City Council majority, except Councilmember John Mirisch, approved a resolution containing a false, unsupportable declaration that the property is “surplus” and not needed for city use.

In addition to questioning the council’s failure to place a clearly worded agenda item on the hearing calendar, residents questioned why, if the council wanted to change the use of the property, protocol was not followed by initiating public outreach to determine how the residents wanted to use the property. As an answer to that question, the council majority seemed to adopt ambiguous statements made by the assistant city manager and city attorney, that nothing could be discussed until a declaration of surplus land had been adopted by the council.

The City Council majority intends to begin negotiations with developers for the lease or sale of the extremely valuable, unique property we need for city use, in complete disregard of residents’ wishes.

Darian Bojeaux

Beverly Hills