On Tuesday night, the Santa Monica City Council voted to end the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Revitalization Partners Group on a 4-3 vote. Two of the Councilmembers that voted to end the agreement sent statements to Santa Monica Next, which are printed below in the order we received them. For Next’s coverage of the vote click here.
Dan Hall:
No one wants to see a viable project on the Civic site more than me. I love going to concerts. When I sat on the top row of the Civic Auditorium with the Mayor Pro Tempore, I deeply felt the legacy of the building and the cherished memories carried by so many. But we are not doing our duty to the community if we artificially handcuff ourselves and not explore alternative paths to getting to a real plan if RPG is unable to deliver. I happily encourage RPG to continue with any future open, fair, and competitive process and believe that this shows we are serious about finding a partner that means business and can deliver.
I want to be very clear – in order to understand the true trade offs, the motion I supported will look at a fully constrained site – with all current structures in place – and an option that is completely unconstrained. That does NOT mean that I do not support the Growing Place or playing fields for our youth and adult sports teams. These are critical assets to our community. It simply means I want to see the true costs various constraints have so we know what we are working with and can make an informed decision.
Caroline Torosis:
The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium is one of our city’s most iconic cultural landmarks and a gathering place that has hosted everything from the Academy Awards to local graduations. I strongly believe it should be preserved and reactivated for future generations to enjoy.
However, it would not be fiscally responsible for the City Council to continue an exclusive negotiating agreement with a development team that, after nearly two years, has been unable to present a financially viable plan to restore and operate the Civic. No scope of work nor anticipated development costs and financing sources have ever been presented. Staff’s independent analysis confirmed that the proposal before us simply cannot be financed.
We owe it to our residents to keep the door open to new opportunities. By ending this ENA, the City can reengage the market and seek partners with the creativity, capacity, and resources to bring the Civic back to life in a way that is both sustainable and true to its historic legacy.
Author
About The Author
