Measure K means the park can be sold
The Park Could Be Sold
Although the proponents of Measure K have represented that the park property will still be protected by Ordinance 1128 and therefore cannot be sold or given away to a developer, this is not correct.
Measure K authorizes the city council, in perpetuity, the ability to sell or give away the land.
The key language is found in Exhibit A, Section 3. While it doesn't use the specific word "sale," it grants the City Council very broad authority to conduct real estate business related to the property.
Ballot Language vs. The Actual Effective Law
It's important to note the different functions of the ordinance's sections. Ballot language never describes the full effects of your vote. The full text of the actual law generated by Measure K is contained in Exhibit A of the Council’s authorizing resolution.
Sections 1 and 2 focus on changing the zoning of the property to allow for housing development. This addresses what can be built.
Section 3 focuses on the transactional authority, giving the City Council the legal power to enter into agreements—including a potential sale—to make that development happen.
Direct Authorization In Section 3
Exhibit A, Section 3 explicitly states that the voters "authorize the City Council to enter into any real estate transactions determined necessary by the City Council to effectuate the development of affordable housing."
A sale is a type of real estate transaction. This language gives the City Council the discretion to sell the property if they decide it's the necessary or best way to get affordable housing built there. It could also authorize other transactions, such as a long-term lease or a development agreement with a builder.
How This Might Play Out: Short Term
The proponents of Measure K have been displaying images of a hypothetical future senior development. This development, while pretty on paper, would be extremely expensive in practice.
Any developer bidding on the project will need to amass capital to accomplish the build. A ground lease issued by the city will save the developer the land acquisition cost, but it will not unlock the value that a loan on the property would.
A developer building on the site may ask the city to deed the property to the developer so that they can borrow against it. In fact, looking at the current capital markets, it is almost certain the developer will make this request. Once this has occurred, all bets are off and the city has lost control of the design and scope of the building at MLK, forever.
How This Might Play Out: Long Term
No one knows what future city councils will want to do with MLK. If a city-developer partnership ends up constructing a development in the park, with the city retaining ownership, the city is taking all the long term risk of maintance and infrastructure. These costs, or other financial pressures unrelated to MLK, could make the sale of this land attractive to the city council. Only three votes would stand in the way of losing the park forever.
