Lancaster Plans More Land Deals Without Appraisals : Real estate: City officials decided in private to spend $1.1 million on parkland. Legal experts say the council broke the law.

For the second time in recent months, city officials in Lancaster are pursuing major real estate purchases without obtaining appraisals and while meeting in private, practices that both violate state laws, legal observers say.

On the heels of a controversial $1.1-million parkland purchase in December that was approved behind closed doors and without an appraisal, city officials this month again decided in private to negotiate for or purchase 12 downtown-area parcels after appraising only two.

And about the same time, the City Council, again meeting in private, gave City Manager Jim Gilley authorization to negotiate with a major housing developer for purchase of part of its more than 200-acre holding for possible development of a county hospital, city officials recently acknowledged.

The city says its acquisition practices are legal. But attorneys for other government agencies insist state law requires appraisals before purchases. And attorneys specializing in the state’s open-meetings law say it is illegal for the city to make such decisions in private.

Tom Newton, general counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Assn. and an expert in the state’s open-meetings law, known as the Brown Act, said the city is illegally keeping the public in the dark.

“This is a complete violation of the act,” he said. “It’s just ridiculous.”

When the City Council voted in mid-November to buy the 22.5 acres of land for a Joshua tree preserve, council members did so entirely behind closed doors. And even though the sale occurred in early December, city officials did not disclose the price until early January.

Thus, it was not until a month after the sale that citizens learned the city had paid nearly $49,000 an acre for the property near Avenue K and 50th Street West, about 45% more than the seller had paid three years earlier. Thus, the public never had a chance to comment on the purchase price of the land until the deal was concluded.

Lancaster City Atty. David McEwen said, and other attorneys agreed, that state law allows public agencies to meet privately to instruct their negotiators on the price and terms of property purchases. But McEwen also says that statute extends to entering into talks and ultimately buying land.

Newton and attorneys for other government agencies maintain that decisions to enter into negotiations and/or buy land must be done in public, and they disagree with McEwen’s reading of the law.

“I completely disagree with that interpretation,” Newton said. “I have never seen that interpretation before. Closed sessions can never be used to make the threshold decisions” to negotiate or finally buy, he said.

On the question of appraisals, state law requires public agencies to almost always obtain appraisals before they purchase property. However, unlike others, McEwen believes the city is exempt any time a seller makes an offer that city officials believe is a good deal.

The downtown-area property deals were approved by City Council members during a closed-door meeting Feb. 3, acting as directors of the city’s Redevelopment Agency. City officials said the council gave approval to buy the sites, even though some council members thought they only agreed to negotiate.

City Redevelopment Director Steve Dukett said the city has appraised only two of the 12 parcels, which consist of three clusters of four parcels each on or near Lancaster Boulevard. And Dukett said city officials considered the council’s action final and have set deals with the four private owners.

After the council’s closed session, council members and City Atty. McEwen returned to the public meeting to identify the parcels and announce the city’s decisions. But city officials refuse to disclose the prices involved.

At about the same time, council members acknowledge, Gilley told the council behind closed doors that he wanted to begin negotiations with a major developer, Presley of Southern California, to explore the city’s purchase of an undeveloped portion of its BelTierra tract for a hospital site.

Council members and Gilley, in recent interviews, said the council gave him approval to negotiate for part of the site at the southeast corner of Avenue I and 30th Street West. No public mention was ever made of that decision.

City of Lancaster Land Purchases 1.The city is buying four parcels at the northwest corner of Lancaster Boulevard and Cedar Avenue. That includes two parcels on the boulevard with existing businesses from the Elizabeth Lang Trust, and two other parcels along Cedar Avenue, one a vacant lot owned by the same trust, and the other a small office building owned by Richard and Barbara Dornberger.

2. The city is buying four parcels at the southwest corner of Lancaster Boulevard and Beech Avenue. All four parcels are owned by Paul and Carole Cramer. Two along Lancaster Boulevard contain existing businesses. Behind them is one vacant lot and another lot with an existing business.

3. The city is trading parcels with retired real estate agent Ellis Pursley, the older brother of Lancaster Councilman Bill Pursley. Under the deal, the city is giving Pursley six small parcels on Yucca Avenue between Nicobar and Norberry Streets. In exchange, Pursley is giving the city four nearby parcels on Norberry Street plus an undisclosed amount of money.