Politics Report: Could the City Lose Liberty Station?

Politics Report: Could the City Lose Liberty Station?

Imagine the city of San Diego selling the sprawling campus of Liberty Station for $2.7 million. What do the buyers think this is? A four-bedroom house in Point Loma? As astonishing as that number sounds, that is the actual offer on the table. And it's not just an offer on the table. The company that wants to buy most of Liberty Station, called Seligman Properties, is doing everything it can to force the sale – in court and by other means.

How We Got Here

Why would a city, or anyone else for that matter, have to sell a property they didn't want to? In this case, it's because Liberty Station isn't a normal property. After its life as Naval Training Center, one of San Diego's redevelopment agencies became the owner of Liberty Station. Redevelopment agencies were quasi-public institutions – and as Voice of San Diego reported, quite a few of them got involved in some shady activity. Gov. Jerry Brown got rid of them in 2012 and their properties went to local governments, known as successor agencies. Here was the catch: Government agencies didn't get to just keep the properties. They either had to sell or come up with future plans for the sites they now owned. They couldn't just sit on them.

The city got 38 properties, the Union-Tribune reported. City leaders decided to keep 22 of them, including Liberty Station, which meant they had to designate the sites as being intended for future development. Enter Seligman: Seligman is the largest leaseholder in Liberty Station. It leases roughly 330,000 square feet of commercial space from the city, which it, in turn, leases to other businesses. But Seligman doesn't want to just lease. It wants to own its part of Liberty Station. Seligman sued the city, arguing it isn't actually making plans for the future development of Liberty Station – meaning the city should be forced to sell.

Why the Lowball?

Seligman is offering the city a little over $2.7 million for Liberty Station, a deal that seems suspiciously low given the property's size and potential. The company's offer has sparked outrage among some city officials and residents, who question whether the city is being taken advantage of. Seligman's CEO, David Seligman, has defended the offer, arguing that the city has failed to develop Liberty Station as promised and that the offer reflects the property's current value.

The city, on the other hand, maintains that it has been working on plans for Liberty Station's future and that the offer undervalues the property. City officials have argued that Seligman's true motive is to gain control of the site at a bargain price, rather than to contribute to its development. The situation has become a contentious battle between the city and Seligman, with the future of Liberty Station hanging in the balance.

The legal battle between the city and Seligman Properties has drawn significant attention from local media and residents. Some argue that the city should stand firm and not sell Liberty Station at such a low price, while others believe that the property has been underdeveloped and that Seligman's offer is the best available option. The outcome of this dispute will likely have a lasting impact on the future of Liberty Station and the city's approach to managing its properties.

As the case continues to unfold, it remains to be seen whether the city will be able to retain control of Liberty Station or if Seligman Properties will succeed in forcing a sale. Regardless of the outcome, the situation highlights the complex challenges faced by local governments in managing their properties and the need for transparency and accountability in decision-making processes.