City to Consider Extending Redevelopment Agency’s Life : Thousand Oaks: The panel has diverted regional funds for local beautification projects, a practice that angers some county administrators.

An ultra-modern, glass-walled Infiniti dealership stands smack in the middle of a strip the Thousand Oaks City Council has declared “blighted.”

So does Thousand Oaks’ most attractive downtown shopping plaza, winner of this year’s City Beautiful competition. And so does the $64-million Civic Arts Plaza.

A three-member majority of the council is poised to recertify this four-mile stretch of Thousand Oaks Boulevard as blighted--a finding necessary to extend the life of the city’s Redevelopment Agency.

Formed 14 years ago to spiff up the city’s oldest commercial area, the Redevelopment Agency collects property taxes from land along Thousand Oaks Boulevard and spends the money on various rehabilitation projects, from cosmetic improvements to affordable housing.

In theory, those projects boost property values along the boulevard. The Redevelopment Agency then reaps the increased tax revenue. Although the county continues to receive a base line amount of taxes, set when the agency was formed in 1979, the city collects every dollar by the higher property values.

The Redevelopment Agency passes on 20% of that money to the county, plus 5% each to the school and park districts, but the bulk of the money stays within Thousand Oaks.

As a result, the Redevelopment Agency has thus far diverted $72 million from county coffers. That money could have been spent beefing up the Sheriff’s Department, cleaning up parks or preserving library hours elsewhere in the county. Instead, it funded local projects, such as the Hampshire Road landscaping and the spruce-up of Thousand Oaks Boulevard’s 2400 block.

Redevelopment backers cite these beautification efforts as proof that the agency works. And they argue that the boulevard face-lift is far from complete. Straggly trees, clashing signs, ugly facades and the odd vacant lot must somehow be taken care of, they say, to position Thousand Oaks’ downtown for a prosperous future.

Toward that end, council members Alex Fiore, Judy Lazar and Frank Schillo have expressed support for an amendment--on the council’s Tuesday night agenda--that would extend the Redevelopment Agency’s life to 2023.

*

The three would also like to generate quick cash for boulevard improvement projects by issuing $120-million worth of bonds, to be paid off over the next three decades with property tax dollars.

But their plan infuriates county administrators, who resent the city’s tenacious grip on its boulevard tax dollars. In a comprehensive fiscal analysis, representatives of the county, the community college district and the fire protection district estimated they would lose millions of dollars if Thousand Oaks siphons away property taxes for the next 30 years.

Fiore, Lazar and Schillo reject these figures. By their reckoning, redevelopment projects boost property values throughout the city, and thus increase the county’s net intake from Thousand Oaks taxpayers.

Redevelopment-funded amenities such as Parque de La Paz and the walkway along the Arroyo Conejo flood channel may not be visible from Thousand Oaks Boulevard, the council members say, but they do enhance the city’s overall tax base.

So far, county administrators aren’t convinced.

“If they can go ahead and do their local projects without hurting us, that’s fine--more power to them,” County Counsel Daniel Murphy said. “But if they say there’s blight and they need our money to cure it, we’ll want to look very, very carefully at whether the blight exists.”

State law leaves that issue open to interpretation.

*

Under current codes, “a blighted area is characterized by . . . (buildings) which are unfit or unsafe to occupy . . . and are conducive to ill health, transmission of disease, infant mortality, juvenile delinquency and crime” because of faulty design, overcrowding, inadequate recreation space or dilapidation.

To declare an area blighted, a city council must find “social and economic maladjustment to such an extent that the capacity to pay taxes is reduced and tax receipts are inadequate” to fix the pervasive problems.

Finally, the council must determine that private investment alone could not be counted on to remedy the blight.

“Redevelopment is intended to be used for areas with high crime, lots of liquor stores, high turnover, high vacancy rates and vacant land,” said Los Angeles attorney Murray Kane, who represents 20 redevelopment agencies across the state.

“It’s meant for a project area that really is dragging the rest of the city down,” Kane said.

By most definitions, the Thousand Oaks redevelopment project area, which stretches from the Los Angeles County line to the Janss Mall, does not drag the city down.

As many as 80 retail stores or offices are vacant, and some undeveloped parcels have become unsightly and unkempt. Nevertheless, the project area generates nearly half of the city’s total sales tax revenue.

Taken separately, the Auto Mall and the boulevard’s small businesses each contribute as much sales tax revenue as The Oaks shopping mall. And the city’s own consultants predict that boutiques and upper-end restaurants could flourish along the boulevard once the Civic Arts Plaza opens next fall and begins attracting thousands of spectators each weekend.

Despite the boulevard’s economic strength, redevelopment boosters say the area needs help.

A raggedy series of shopping centers dot the area, and the boulevard could use some uniform landscaping, fresh signs and outdoor amenities such as park benches and attractive street lights, according to a Redevelopment Agency report.

And the city will only be able to fund such improvements by capturing local property taxes for local use, Schillo said.

“We’re not going to be able to do it from the general fund,” he said. “You have got to improve businesses constantly. You can’t have a place looking like a schlock store in the front and expect people to shop there.”

But opponents contend that business owners, not government, should take the initiative to slap on fresh paint and plant healthy shrubs.

“I can see no proof that Thousand Oaks Boulevard is blighted,” said Mayor Elois Zeanah, who constantly speaks out against the Redevelopment Agency. If the Redevelopment Agency holds the purse strings, she added: “the city will be calling the shots, instead of the businesses.”

*

Zeanah and Councilwoman Jaime Zukowski both oppose the Redevelopment Agency’s most visible accomplishment--the performing arts and government complex known as the Civic Arts Plaza. Property taxes from boulevard businesses picked up half the $64-million cost; the rest is supposed to come primarily from the sale of two former city halls.

They also object to the city’s plans to incur $120 million in debt for boulevard rehabilitation--a sum Zeanah called “astronomical and beyond belief.”

Finally, while the Redevelopment Agency’s existence does not by itself raise taxes, Zeanah and Zukowski argue that Thousand Oaks residents end up paying more, because the cash-strapped county must levy special assessments to make up for money redirected toward boulevard improvements.

Some business owners along the boulevard agree.

“County funds are getting skinnier and skinnier,” said Wayne Caywood, the owner of Malibu Fish N’ Tackle. “We need police protection and other services before we worry about (landscaping).”

Caywood also scoffed at claims that boulevard beautification would keep his cash register ringing. “People are not going to run out and spend more money because of improvements on the boulevard,” he said.

In truth, less than half the property tax receipts would actually be used on the boulevard.

By law, the council must set aside 20% to build affordable housing. The city has also promised to use redevelopment money for an auditorium at Thousand Oaks High School and a stadium at Westlake High. Plans for the downtown area include burying overhead utility lines, adding more parking and improving sidewalks.

So far, the city has refused to detail exactly what projects it intends to carry out with redevelopment money.

*

Although county representatives have repeatedly asked for cost estimates and timetables, city redevelopment specialist Paul Farr told them he did not want to lock future councils into policy decisions on how to spend property tax receipts.

But under a new state law, the city will have to come up with an in-depth “implementation plan” for its redevelopment funds by the end of 1994.

The new law also tightens the definition of blight, in an attempt to limit redevelopment to troubled urban areas that present a “prevalent and substantial” burden on the community.

Prompted by widely publicized abuses of redevelopment agencies, the law takes effect Jan. 1. By acting now, the Thousand Oaks council can squeak by under the old law, with its more lenient definition of blight.

After hearing public testimony Tuesday night, the council will adjourn for a week to consider all comments. It will then reconvene for a formal vote Nov. 2. If the redevelopment amendment passes as expected, it would take effect in early December, just weeks before the law changes.

Redevelopment specialist Farr said prolonging the boulevard agency’s life would be “more difficult, but still possible” under the new law. He insisted that “all the elements are there” to declare blight in the redevelopment project area.

Unconvinced, resident Ekbal Quidwai plans to picket Tuesday’s City Council meeting with signs declaring “My Hometown 1,000 Oaks Is Not Blighted.” And he has mailed packets to business owners along the boulevard and local activists throughout the city, urging them to address the council.

Even a strong showing, however, is unlikely to sway the council majority. Fiore, Lazar and Schillo have consistently voted in favor of the preliminary steps needed to prepare for an extended Redevelopment Agency.

*

Ventura County could derail the trio’s plans by filing a formal objection to the amendment. The city of Thousand Oaks is bound by contract to obtain the county’s written consent before tinkering with its Redevelopment Agency. Thus, if the council moves ahead over county objections, the county could sue for breach of contract, according to Murphy, the county counsel.

To forestall such an outcome, city and county representatives will meet Monday to negotiate a compromise. The city will probably raise the amount of redevelopment money it passes on to the county--and may even promise some funds to the community college district as well.