RDA Min 1992-06-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

---- --- .--- -- .-0' -- --- - - -- --- .--- - - - .---- Redevelopment Agent had been somewhat lax in communicating the true meaning of the Redevelopment Project to the point that as late as last week Mr. Michaels accompanied Mr. Phillips to meet with the Cooks to explain what the Project was all about and what relocation and other services and assistance the Agency would provide. Mr. Schricker advised the legal rights of the owners are not affected by the filing of the action, and the issue of compensation would be addressed during court proceedings. Mr. Phillips stated he had not mentioned the issue of compensation. The Board of Directors discussed continuation of the proceedings affecting the Cook property, and a motion was made and withdrawn. Mr. Adams described the process of granting the order of possession after the money had been deposited, which can be drawn down by any of the owners at their request and they still have not waived their right to ask for more compensation. They have a minimum of ninety (90) days in which the Agency has to relocate them. Mr. Phillips asked to confer with his clients, the Cooks. Chairwoman La Berge agreed to give Mr. Phillips time to confer with his clients and asked the next property owners to come forward. Mr. and Mrs. Schiavone, 1025 El Camino Real, expressed shock at the filing of the documents tomorrow as they had not spoken to the Redevelopment Agency agent Mr. Michaels for a month and a half. Mr. Schiavone stated Mr. Michaels made one offer and he made one counter offer and that was the last contact he had with the Agency. The Schiavones stated Mr. Michaels was moving their tenants out and advised the tenants to sue the Schiavones. Mr. Schiavone questioned why Mr. Michaels was not present at this hearing, and told the Board they needed more time to relocate and to move their corporation's fragile machinery. In response to questions from Mr. Schricker the Schiavones stated they did not have legal counsel. Mr. Adams stated he was sure that Mr. Michaels explained the relocation law to the Schiavones and would attempt to relocate them and has a duty to do so. The Schiavone's counter offer was twice the offer of the Agency, and there might not have been a reason to go further with negotiations at that point. The law requires relocation and required that tenants must be made aware of what was happening at the time the offer is made. If the tenants and the land owners do not agree that will end up in the court action which is filed to determine their rights just as Mr. Davies was told that Southern Pacific and he and Mr. Kopf will all have their rights determined by a court of law. At this Redevelopment Agency Minutes June 8, 1992 Page 10 MINUTE BOOK NO.1 Page No. 70