Palmdale council approves extended agreement with Covington for Antelope Valley Commerce Center

Palmdale city officials on Tuesday approved an amended and restated purchase-and-sale agreement with AVCC Master LLC, an affiliate of Covington Investments, for land at the southeast corner of Avenue M and Sierra Highway.

Megan Tager, Palmdale's director of economic and community development, told the council the revision extends the developer's deadline to market and secure a tenant to June 2027, adds flexibility in sequencing development by tying primary, secondary and tertiary development tracks to previously agreed purchase prices rather than to specific phases, and recognizes approximately $22 million in expenses the developer front‑loaded for regional improvements necessary to start construction.

Why it matters: The Antelope Valley Commerce Center is planned to accommodate up to roughly 8 million square feet of industrial space under an existing comprehensive specific plan. The amended agreement is designed to preserve the city's entitlement package and allow the developer more time to recruit tenants while protecting the city's investment in environmental studies, plans and entitlements if the purchaser defaults.

Public comment: Labor representatives and local business groups spoke in favor of the amendment. Renee Palacios, a business agent with Ironworkers Local 433, said a yes vote would be "an investment in local families, local workers, and a workforce pipeline that keeps opportunity rooted right here in Palmdale." Josh Christiansen of the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters and other union speakers likewise urged approval, citing local apprenticeship and living‑wage opportunities the project could create. Several speakers emphasized that the developer commits to using a skilled local workforce and paying responsible wages and benefits.

Opposition and concerns: At least one resident, who identified himself as Jason Zing, urged the council to delay approval and renegotiate parts of the deal. He argued the property had been inactive for several years and said the city should seek higher deposits or additional concessions rather than simply extending the timeline; he characterized the prior selection of the developer as opaque and asked for broader solicitation of bids. The transcript records the objection and the request to renegotiate; the council nevertheless moved forward.

Council action and outcome: After closing public testimony, council discussion focused on job creation, infrastructure costs and the urgency of delivering local, mortgage‑paying jobs. A motion and second to approve the amended and restated purchase-and-sale agreement were recorded; the item was decided by voice vote and the mayor announced the motion passed. The motion text, mover and seconder were recorded in the meeting minutes but no numerical roll-call tally appears in the public transcript.

Next steps: The amended agreement allows Covington additional time to market the site and to sequence development according to the contract tracks; the city will retain entitlement documents and plans should a purchaser default, per the agreement language described in the staff presentation.