Listen Live
Donate
 on air
Schedule

KCRW

Read & Explore

  • News
  • Entertainment
  • Food
  • Culture
  • Events

Listen

  • Live Radio
  • Music
  • Podcasts
  • Full Schedule

Information

  • About
  • Careers
  • Help / FAQ
  • Newsletters
  • Contact

Support

  • Become a Member
  • Become a VIP
  • Ways to Give
  • Shop
  • Member Perks

Become a Member

Donate to KCRW to support this cultural hub for music discovery, in-depth journalism, community storytelling, and free events. You'll become a KCRW Member and get a year of exclusive benefits.

DonateGive Monthly

Copyright 2025 KCRW. All rights reserved.

Report a Bug|Privacy Policy|Terms of Service|
Cookie Policy
|FCC Public Files

Schwarzenegger deal continues to haunt Jerry Brown

Have you ever made a deal to buy something, only to have the seller tell you that it’s not actually for sale, after all? That’s what a group of Texas…

  • Share
By Darrell Satzman • Dec 2, 2014 • 1 min read

Have you ever made a deal to buy something, only to have the seller tell you that it’s not actually for sale, after all?

That’s what a group of Texas and Irvine investors say happened to them – and the seller was the state of California.

A trial begins today in San Francisco that will determine whether California has to sell off 11 properties that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger agreed to part with in 2010 to help reduce California’s then $25 billion budget deficit. The $2.3 billion sale was controversial from the start, in part because the state agreed to lease back the buildings from the buyer.

Gov. Brown nixed the deal shortly after taking office. He said it amounted to an accounting trick that would cost the state more than $1 billion over the long haul.

Two of the properties are in downtown Los Angeles, including the Ronald Reagan State Building on Spring Street. Others include the San Francisco Civic Center and the Secretary of State building in Sacramento.

The state is expected to argue at trial that the deal was nullified when the investment group – California First – failed to make a payment on time.

California First says that’s baloney. The company claims California simply backed out of the deal when it got cold feet. In addition to asking the court to enforce the sale, the plaintiffs are seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in economic losses.

  • https://images.ctfassets.net/2658fe8gbo8o/AvYox6VuEgcxpd20Xo9d3/769bca4fbf97bf022190f4813812c1e2/new-default.jpg?h=250

    Darrell Satzman

    Producer

    News StoriesBusiness & EconomyPolitics