Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> II I ,. <br /> time Mr. Michaels is trying to relocate the Schiavones, their <br /> corporation and their tenants. <br /> Mr. Schricker asked the Schiavones if they would prefer another <br /> - representative from the Redevelopment Agency to work with them. <br /> The Schiavones responded yes. Mr. Schiavone stated he asked Mr. <br /> Michaels to not come on his property again. Mr. Schiavone stated he <br /> had just received his appraisal for his property which was 20% higher <br /> than the Agency's offer. Mr. Schiavone asked for a continuation on the <br /> grounds he wants to find out what is happening. Mrs. Schiavone stated <br /> they have 100% occupancy and do not have problems with their tenants, <br /> and asked to have their building duplicated. In response to questions <br /> from the Board, Mr. Schiavone stated the City told every potential <br /> tenant that their property was in the Redevelopment area and could be <br /> torn down. Mr. Schiavone stated that he had been told by a former <br /> Council four years ago that if sufficient movement hadn't taken place <br /> in six months they would take a serious look at the Redevelopment <br /> Agency. Mr. Schiavone stated that right now the Agency was taking his <br /> livelihood and giving it to Safeway. Mrs. Schiavone asked the Board to <br /> help them with relocation. <br /> Mr. Adams advised that eminent domain law provides full fair market <br /> value for the property where it is located, but does not require <br /> replacement to be a duplicate. The law does not require an agency to <br /> pay what it would cost to replace brick by brick what an owner has. <br /> Mrs. Schiavone advised they were not there to discuss money. <br /> - Mr. Schricker advised another representative for the Agency would be <br /> nominated to continue negotiations with the Schiavones; exchange of <br /> appraisals and further negotiations would take place, especially after <br /> the eminent domain proceedings are filed; expressed concern that the <br /> Schiavones are not represented by Counsel at this hearing, and their <br /> questions depend on the understanding of the law which their own <br /> attorney could explain to them as to eminent domain and valuation <br /> matters; and, a continuance must be to a date certain and it should be <br /> relatively soon, later today or tomorrow, as a 2/3 vote is required. <br /> Mr. Schiavone again asked for a continuance to deal with someone other <br /> than Mr. Michaels, and Mrs. Schiavone addressed the issue of Counsel <br /> fees. In response to questions from the Board the Schiavones stated <br /> they do not reside at that property. <br /> Mr. Church described the law and relocating tenants, and the decisions <br /> regarding responses to offers are collective decisions. The gap <br /> between the original offer and the counter by the Schiavones was so <br /> great that the decision was made to wait to give them time to get their <br /> own appraisal. No matter who negotiates the matter, it is to some <br /> extent bound to become an adversarial relationship. <br /> Redevelopment Agency Minutes <br /> .June 8, 1992 <br /> Page 11 <br /> - <br /> MINUTE BOOK NO.1 <br /> Page No. 71 <br />