City and CRA officials told the Carson City Council that a recently finalized settlement with the prior developer removes a major legal obstacle to redevelopment of the 157‑acre CalCompact landfill site and opens the way for new private investment.

Diane Thomas, a CRA board member, said the settlement allows the CRA to move forward after years of litigation and that a developer the board favors (identified in discussion as Faring/Fairing Development) holds options to pursue major retail on one portion of the site while the master‑planned industrial areas (cells 3–5) remain subject to market and financing conditions. Thomas said staff are pursuing infrastructure work already in progress on Leonardo Drive and are seeking to deliver a public amenity (Carson Place park, amphitheater, dog park, food halls) targeted for 2028 around the Olympics timeframe.

Councilmember Jim Dear asked pointed questions about the settlement amount and city liability. The city attorney corrected public statements suggesting the city paid $35,000,000, saying instead the city paid $0; the reported $35,000,000 was the purchase price paid by the acquiring developer under the conveyancing terms negotiated through the CRA. The attorney said the settlement effectively resolved prior claims and left the CRA free to select a new developer and proceed under the conveyancing agreement.

City staff and the CRA executive director described technical constraints remaining at the site: long lead times for Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) approvals on liner designs and landfill gas systems, the need for remedial action completion reports to unlock enterprise funds, and ongoing construction work (sewer, storm drain, domestic and recycled water infrastructure on Leonardo Drive) that is scheduled to continue into spring. Staff said industrial market conditions have softened since 2019, affecting financing assumptions for industrial parcels, while the board is prioritizing delivery of park/amenity components and select retail acreage that could support sales‑tax revenue.

Councilmembers pressed for transparency on financial terms, tax‑sharing and the specific obligations the city or CRA would accept in any developer agreement; staff said further details on purchase agreements and funding would be provided in future reports. The council asked staff to return with regular updates on remediation milestones, funding releases, and negotiated development terms.