Committee reviews Convention Center update; removes Gil Lindsay Plaza from debt-financed scope

City administrative staff presented an update to the Economic Development and Jobs Committee on the proposed expansion and modernization of the Los Angeles Convention Center and a value-engineering process intended to reduce project cost and annual debt service. Committee members voted to note and file the report and instructed staff to prepare follow-up analyses on using arts-fee funds and a stand-alone renovation for Gil Lindsay Plaza.

The City Administrative Officer, Matt Sabo, told the committee the council had instructed staff to pursue a phased delivery approach and deliver a project agreement and timeline that would allow construction to begin by September 2025 so that the work could be completed after the 2028 Olympics. Ben Sehaw, assistant CAO, said consultants and city bureaus had produced more than 300 engineering ideas, winnowed to 56 proposals valued at about $124 million in potential cost reductions and about $10 million in reduced annual debt service.

"One of the most significant items was the removal of Gilbert Lindsay Plaza from the scope," Sehaw said, describing the recommendation to handle the plaza as a separate, stand-alone city project and to explore earmarking the arts development fee to pay for its design and construction.

Gary Lee Moore, the project executive consultant, described the value-engineering review as a cross-agency exercise involving the CAO, City Attorney, Bureau of Engineering, and outside technical and cost-estimating firms. Moore and staff said some ideas were infeasible, would reduce future revenue potential, or would add schedule risk. "If you cut too much of the scope, you'll reduce the revenue opportunities," one presenter said, explaining tradeoffs between cost savings and future bookings.

Public speakers at the meeting largely supported the expansion. Rich Sarian, vice president of the Social District / South Park BID, said the project would "create thousands of jobs" and "guide tourism back to the city." Nela McCosker of the Central City Association said the plan could support both vulnerable communities and large infrastructure investment. Rob Nathoff of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor urged support for the project’s labor provisions, including a project-labor agreement and a 50% local-hire component.

Council members pressed staff on two main risks: tariffs and freeway-facing signage. Staff said known tariffs are being identified for committed proposals and that the project agreement should include terms to address future tariff changes. On signage, the CAO team said state legislation (referred to in the report as AB 770) and a federal state-federal agreement governing highway signage would be necessary to eliminate risk for freeway-facing signs; staff said a state bill would need to reach the governor by late July for a determination in early August.

Council members asked for clarity on whether removing Gil Lindsay Plaza from the debt-financed scope meant shelving the park. Staff recommended proceeding with the plaza on a separate track, possibly using the arts development fee, but said they would return with a firm legal opinion and an implementation plan. The committee instructed the CAO, with the City Attorney and Cultural Affairs, to report back on the feasibility of using 1% of the arts development fee for Gil Lindsay Plaza and directed the Bureau of Engineering (with other departments) to report on a stand-alone, city-led renovation of Gil Lindsay Plaza including cost, revenue analysis, and a phased approach to account for the 2028 games.

At the end of the presentation the committee voted to note and file the CAO report and to adopt the requested follow-up instructions. The committee’s vote was recorded as in favor and the item was approved as presented.