 |
|
|
|
Photograph by Jacqueline Ramseyer
The Vallco Fashion Park was declared a 'blighted area' in August, 2000. However, the Cupertino Citizens for Affordable Housing has filed suit against the city, contesting the designation.
|
Negotiations continue in lawsuit
City, Citizens for Affordable Housing discussing ways to reach a solution
By KEVIN FAYLE
The city of Cupertino wants very much to improve the Vallco Fashion Park. So much so that it swallowed its pride in the seemingly unblemished town and declared the area blighted on Aug. 21, 2000, a designation ordinarily reserved for sites of urban decay. The decision also established a redevelopment agency to funnel tax dollars into a 30-year renovation for the ailing mall.
Over the last year, however, the project has barely moved past that point.
Soon after the Cupertino City Council created the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency, a group of residents dissatisfied with the arrangement filed a lawsuit alleging that the city's move constituted an illegal appropriation of tax money.
The organization, Cupertino Citizens for Affordable Housing, began the lawsuit in Oct. 2000, and is still in negotiations with the city. In summary, the suit claims that the city had no right under the California Community Redevelopment Law, which governs redevelopment projects, to declare the area blighted.
The project, according to the suit, aims to increase the competitiveness of the shopping mall for private gain, rather than improving a withering region of the city for the public good.
The city has said it will examine its options in regard to the housing element of the project.
In addition, the plaintiffs allege the city doesn't have enough evidence to justify the agency's formation, and that the siphoning of taxpayer's money away from Santa Clara County and school districts will injuriously affect public services. The group holds particular concerns about the project's effects on low-income residents.
Under the redevelopment plan approved by the city council, the redevelopment agency will receive the property tax revenues from the fashion park, estimated to exceed $52 million over the 30-year life of the project. From this amount, taxing entities such as Santa Clara County and local school districts will receive roughly $17.3 million. The project must also establish a Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund, which will likely receive around $10.5 million.
The plaintiffs are concerned over the fact that the plan does not state how the money in the housing fund will be spent. Also, they worry that any decrease in the tax revenue the taxing entities receive will result in a commensurate decline in services for local residents.
The suit purports to examine the legal validity of the redevelopment plan, but the plaintiffs acknowledge that a different subtext lies beneath all the legalese. Like their name says, the plaintiffs have concerns over affordable housing in Cupertino and have stated that their primary goal lies with increasing the affordable housing element in the project.
"If they're going to use taxpayer money to spruce up the shopping center, they need to do a lot more for affordable housing," said William Litt, legal representation for the organization.
Litt serves as a managing attorney for Bay Area Legal Aid, a nonprofit agency that offers legal assistance in matters of housing, as well as free legal services to people with very low incomes.
Despite the hard language of the lawsuit, the plaintiffs repeatedly assert they don't want to kill the project.
"We don't necessarily want to stop it, we just want them to make a more tangible commitment to affordable housing," Litt said.
Gertrude Welch, one of the members of the organization, has long fought for affordable housing in the region. The county board of supervisors honored Welch in May with a Unity in Diversity Achievement Award celebrating a career of philanthropy that has spanned more than half a century.
Welch said she believes the project represents an "opportunity for Cupertino to demonstrate that they really are serious about building affordable housing."
She repeats that she and the rest of the organization do not want to shut the project down entirely. For Welch, the suit really centers on increasing the amount of tax revenue that goes into the housing fund. Under the current plan, 20 percent of the money generated from property taxes goes into the fund, which keeps the plan aligned with redevelopment law. Welch would like to see the figure increased.
"I personally would like to see at least 30 percent going into the housing fund," she said.
The organizations have entered into discussions over the issue. The fact that the city has engaged in such negotiations, which cover housing matters rather than the objections stated in the suit, reveals a possible vulnerability with the structure of the original redevelopment plan.
However, neither side will discuss the terms of the negotiations, for fear they might affect the outcome. They even stay tight-lipped about the schedule of the bargaining.
However, both sides said the negotiations continue to move forward and that each side has remained committed to finding a solution that all parties can support. After all, without the redevelopment, the housing fund receives 20 percent of nothing and the city gets stuck with a floundering mall.
"We believe the city's negotiating in good faith, but we're still pretty far apart," Litt said.
The city affirms they will closely examine their options in regard to housing, according to Steve Piasecki, the city's director of community development. "[The Cupertino citizens] would like to see more housing opportunities included in the plan. The city is looking at ways to do that," he said.
Litt hopes the negotiations will produce a situation that both entities can live with, but also says his clients will stick to their guns.
"If the city doesn't make the commitment, then we definitely will do what we can to stop the project, but the whole goal is housing," he said.
|
|
|
|
Cupertino, California Since 1947
