Dozens of property and business owners around the Staples Center arena project are fighting the city’s efforts to buy them out.

The Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency has reached agreements with only nine of the 48 property owners it intends to buy out to make way for more arena parking and future hotel and retail development, according to CRA Deputy Administrator Don Spivack.

The CRA has launched condemnation proceedings against the other 39 owners, many of whom are holding out for more money than the agency has offered to date.

In addition, dozens of businesses operating on those properties ranging from a liquor store to a car rental agency to a dance hall are looking for more relocation money.

The property owners claim that the CRA’s stated intention to use the land for 3,250 extra parking spaces for the arena is misleading in light of statements by arena developers Ed Roski Jr. and Philip Anschutz that they intend to bring hotel and retail development to the area. The prospect of such development, these property owners argue, means the CRA should pay them more than the agency would if the land were used only for parking.

CRA officials said all the properties must be vacated by next summer so the agency can make way for new parking lots that must be ready by the time the center opens in October 1999.

Staples Center spokesman Michael Roth said construction of the arena itself should not be affected by any delays in the property acquisition process, since no arena construction is slated for the properties in question.

The 48 properties to be acquired encompass 23 acres and are situated in two clusters. One, called the Olympic properties, is on the block bounded by Olympic Boulevard, the Harbor (110) Freeway, 11th and Figueroa streets. The other cluster is on the east side of Figueroa Street, stretching from just north of 11th Street nearly all the way down to Pico Boulevard.

The property owners range in size from the giant Japan-based construction firm Obayashi Corp. to families who have no other property holdings.

Meanwhile, the CRA has been issuing eviction notices to dozens of tenants. Many of them don’t want to leave their present locations, where they have built up a client base.

One such tenant is Teresa Seradsky, president and owner of MPG Car Rental at the corner of Figueroa and 11th streets. In June, Seradsky was served with a notice that the CRA intends to possess the property within 90 days. Since then, she has hired an attorney and is in negotiations with the CRA over terms of a relocation assistance and compensation package.

“I’ve been here for 16 years and more than half of my business comes from the Convention Center,” Seradsky said. “I’m a single mother with three children. This is my livelihood and it is now in the hands of the government.” (The Los Angeles Convention Center is adjacent to the Staples Center site.)

“It’s not just about money,” said Seradsky’s attorney, Tim Gray. “It’s also about how people try to rebuild their lives after everything they know is ripped out from under them.”

For many of the property owners, however, the main issue is money. They claim that the CRA’s stated intention to convert all the parcels to parking lots is a ruse because it ultimately plans to have retail and hotel projects built on much of the land. The CRA, they say, is purposely using the lower zoning classification as a way to low-ball appraised values and pay less money.

“We have been advised by the CRA that these properties are being acquired for a proposed parking lot, but the developer (of Staples Center) has stated that the land will be used for a hotel and retail use. They believe the highest and best use of the property is not for parking,” said John Dee, a property compensation attorney with the Los Angeles law office of Sullivan, Workman & Dee.

Dee, who spoke at the Aug. 20 CRA board hearing, represents Obayashi, which owns two parking lots on Figueroa Street.

CRA officials say they are under legal obligation to initially convert all the land to parking lots. Spivack conceded, however, that much of the property will later be converted to retail or entertainment uses “that will be compatible with the arena.” The anticipated future use has no bearing on the current value of the property, he added.

“The property should be valued on what is the highest and best use for today, and that immediate use is parking,” Spivack said. “We made an agreement with the developers of the Staples Center that we would deliver 3,250 spaces for parking. To do that, we need about 300 square feet per parking space, which amounts to the 23 acres we need to acquire.”

On further questioning, Spivack conceded that city building codes only require parking spaces to be 150 square feet, but the other acreage is needed for driveways, walkways and landscaping.

Dee countered at the hearing that if the CRA were merely interested in providing parking, it could lease the land from Obayashi. “Since parking lots are already there, no changes would have to be made to the property.”

The CRA responded that it needs to assemble the property around the arena with itself as the sole owner to avoid having to deal with possible conflicting desires of several property owners.

“It is simply not feasible or possible to enter into a series of agreements with the multitude of different property owners,” said William Delvac, an attorney with Latham & Watkins who represents the CRA.

In most cases, according to land-use attorney O’Malley Miller of Munger, Tolles & Olson, the courts have held that the current market value of the property and not the value based on future development should be the determining factor in how much redevelopment agencies should compensate the landowner.

However, Miller noted, a court previously found that the CRA had underestimated the market value of property it acquired in the late 1980s to make way for expanding the Convention Center.