Conservancy Expected to OK Plan to Buy Canyon : Environment: But official calls deal for Studio City land a ‘gift of public funds to a politically connected developer.’

A key state park official who earlier had cast doubt on a controversial plan to buy Fryman Canyon for $10.9 million said Friday that he is convinced the plan will be approved.

Mayor Tom Bradley, meanwhile, defended the plan worked out by his aides and Councilman Michael Woo to save the steeply sloped Studio City property from development as a luxury housing project, calling it a “happy solution for everyone.”

The deal provides for developer Fred Sahadi, who has clashed bitterly with area residents, to receive an “equitable price for the property while everyone can enjoy the rustic beauty and environmental treasures of Fryman Canyon,” the mayor said at a City Hall press conference.

Under the plan, the city will put up $1.96 million, residents living near the canyon will contribute $240,000 and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a state parks agency, will contribute $8.7 million.

Conservancy Executive Director Joe Edmiston repeated his earlier attacks on the Bradley-Woo plan, calling it a “gift of public funds to a politically connected developer.”

But Edmiston also said he was convinced that Bradley has the votes on the conservancy board of directors “to put this plan through. This would not have been announced like it was unless the votes were there.”

The failure to obtain a state-approved appraisal to support the purchase price “abuses long-established procedures for buying park land,” he said.

A year-old appraisal jointly paid for by the conservancy and Sahadi placed the value at $13.7 million, but after a review, state officials said the appraised value should be $8.7 million.

Bradley said Friday that “whatever amount in excess of $8.7 million is paid (for the property) is of no consequence to the state.”

State General Services Administration officials have told his aides that state law does not prohibit government agencies from collectively exceeding the appraised value of property as long as state agencies do not contribute more than the appraised value, Bradley said.

But Edmiston disagreed, saying an informal opinion his office obtained from the state attorney general’s office “says that you can’t give away public funds like that, no matter whether it’s a non-state agency or not kicking in the extra amount.”

He said the Bradley-Woo plan sets a precedent that “will be used endlessly by developers to jack the price up over the appraised value.”

Edmiston said he will recommend that the conservancy board seek a formal attorney general’s opinion on the legality of the Bradley-Woo plan. “But I don’t have much hope after what I’ve heard from people in the know today,” he said. “If the votes are there for the Bradley plan, then the votes will not be there to seek a formal opinion that I think will say that the plan violates the state Constitution.”

Carole Stevens, chairwoman of the conservancy’s seven-member board, said Friday that she had no idea how other board members felt but that she would move to obtain a formal opinion.

“As much as I want to buy Fryman Canyon,” she said, “I don’t want to take a chance on violating the law. And if it would be illegal, then we should get an updated appraisal and then go from there.”

Although the conservancy board meets Monday, Stevens said Fryman Canyon probably wouldn’t be considered since the agenda was already set. It could be considered at the board’s Oct. 1 meeting.