The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011/08/26 Item 01 - Additional information August 2, 2011 1 2 June 28 to October 1, 2011 Agency powers suspended October 1, 2011 Absent participation in Alternative Program Agency dissolved 3 No New Debt  No New or Amended Contracts  No New or Amended Plans  4 Pay or Perform Enforceable Obligations  Preserve Assets  Prepare and Adopt Enforceable Obligations Payment  Schedule 5 Not Enforceable –with Limited Exceptions  Exceptions:  Agreements entered into prior to • 12/31/10 providing security for debt City loans made within 2 years of Activation of • Agency 6 Continue to exist  Enactment of Ordinance  Payment of Ransom  Agency Backfill  7 Average of Participating RDA’s (1) pro rata share of  Statewide Net TI multiplied by $1.7 billion & (2) pro rata share of Statewide Gross TI multiplied by $1.7 billion Based on 2008-09 numbers  8 Sum of 2 amounts 1. 2011-12 payment x 23.52% x FY 12-13 Adj TI FY 11-12 Adj TI 2. Net school share x New Debt Service x % Factor 9 Sum of 2 amounts 1. Prior year remittance x Current Year Adj TI Prior Year Adj TI 2. Net school share x New Debt Service x % Factor 10 RDA is Dissolved  Debt and obligations after January 1 of year in which  payment not made are unenforceable City/Agency agreements become unenforceable with  limited exceptions 11 Dissolved 10/1/11  Successor Agency is City  If City elects not to Act as Successor Agency, then 1 st  Taxing Agency that volunteers 12 Pay enforceable obligations as shown on recognized  payment schedule Dispose of RDA Assets  13 City may elect to retain housing assets &  functions Transfer to Housing Authority  Transfer to HCD  14 Transfer of Housing Assets & Functions  Includes all rights, powers, duties and  obligations Excludes Housing Fund  15 7 members Appointed By Board of Supervisors (2) Mayor (1) County Sup. of Ed (1) Chancellor of Calif. Community Colleges (1) Largest Special District (1) Former RDA employee (appointed by Mayor) (1) 16 Approves acts of successor Agency  Subject to review by Dept. of Finance  May negotiate with City for City to purchase assets  May terminate contracts with payment of compensation  17 Audit RDA assets and liabilities by 3/1/12  Determine annually amount of Tax Increment and  Deposit in Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund Administer Trust Fund for benefit of bondholders and  taxing entities 18 Pay Pass Throughs  Pay Successor Agency amount required to pay  enforceable obligation Pay Successor Agency amount to pay administrative  costs 19 If either Act successfully challenged, Agency cannot issue  Debt If ABx1 27 invalidated, ABx1 26 survives  20 On July 18, 2011, the CRA, the League of California  Cities, and the Cities of San Jose and Union City (“Petitioners”) filed a lawsuit in the California Supreme Court Petitioners claimed that AB 26 and AB 27 violate the  California Constitution in that they improperly directed the use of property taxes away from RDA’s The Supreme Court ordered and received informal  briefing on the lawsuit from both parties. The matter is still pending before the Supreme Court 21 22 Payment Amount to State FY04-05 ERAF765,000 FY05-06 ERAF930,000 FY09-10 SERAF4,160,694 FY10-11 SERAF856,613 TOTAL$6,712,307 FY11-12 Tsf4,117,165 FY12-13 & Forward Tsf968,745 23 24 25 26 Using “Polanco” for Bayfront Redevelopment Presented by: Richard G. Opper Opper & Varco LLP www.envirolawyer.com POLANCO Redevelopment was complicated by  unknowns regarding “waste” The issue of responsibility can paralyze  negotiations Polanco provided certainty  POLANCO Provides three benefits:  Cost Recovery • Regulatory Reform • Immunity • POLANCO Immunity Attaches upon completion of • clean-up New federal implications • POLANCO Cost Recovery “Any actions” • Attorneys fees • Interest • POLANCO Cost Recovery  CERCLA • Porter-Cologne • POLANCO “An agency may take any actions . . .  to remedy . . . a release of hazardous substances on . . . a project area . . . .” Health & Safety Code §  33549.1(2)(1) POLANCO “Polanco gives redevelopment  agencies ‘more clout to clean-up blighted properties.’” Sen. Rules Comm.; Analysis of  S.B. 1898 (95-96 Reg. Sess.)  HISTORIC CONTEXT NUISANCE:  “. . . Injurious . . . indecent or  offensive to the senses . . .  obstruction to the free use . . . .”  Calif. Civ. Code §3479  HISTORIC CONTEXT Maintaining a nuisance is not a compensable property right POLANCO Constraints Within a project area • Following 60-day notice • Subject to Environmental • Regulatory Agency agreement POLANCO Agency does not need to own property, but can use Act to remedy blight in a redevelopment project area. Salvation Army, 103 C.A.4 th 755 (2002) POLANCO Redevelopment Agency of the City of San  Diego vs. Salvation Army 103 Cal. App. 4 th 755 (2002)  www.Envirolawyer.com  POLANCO Joint Power Agreements • Government Code §6502.7 • Injunctive Relief • RDA of San Diego v. SDG&E, • 111 Cal.App.4 th 912 (2003) Decision Have $/Opt In Can’t Pay/Opt Out Administer Payment and Obligation Appeal Operation as Schedule Obligation Payment? Usual Schedule and back Aug 15, 2011 up Aug 26, 2011 Other preparations Adopt Ordinance SOI & back up Act as for Housing Assets data Oct 1, 2011 Successor and Admin Oct 1, 2011 Agency? Oct 1, 2011 Oct 1, 2011 42 Participate in the Voluntary Redevelopment Program 43 $2.8 million from FY 11-12 Low-Mod  Housing Fund $1.3 million from Tax Increment  (Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan) • 44 Business Improvement Grant Program  Neighborhood Revitalization Program  Affordable Housing Projects  E Street Transit Oriented Development  Main Street Streetscape Program  Third Avenue Streetscape Program  Bay Front Redevelopment Project  Opt-In Actions (AB x1 27)Due Date AdoptEnforceable Obligation Payment 8/27/2011 Schedule Adopt a non-binding Resolution of Intent to 10/1/2011 Adopt an Ordinance Complete enactmentof Opt-In Ordinance11/1/2011 Remit Payments1/15/2011 & 5/15/2011; annually thereafter Continue RDAactivitiesOngoing 46 August 2, 2011  Ordinance to Opt-In  August 9, 2011  Second Reading of Ordinance • September 13, 2011  Resolution for FY 11-12 Low Mod Housing • Fund Allocation Resolution for Remittance Agreement • Appropriate funds • 47 48 Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency Low/Mod Housing Fund FY 2010-11FY 2011-12FY 2012-13FY 2013-14FY 2014-15FY 2015-16 Beginning Fund Balance $ 8,473,109 $ 5,780,884 $ 5,226,837 $ 8,754,372 $ 12,821,260 $ 17,028,097 Gross Housing Set- Aside2,805,522 2,861,632 2,918,865 2,977,242 3,036,787 3,097,523 Landings Debt Service242,820 242,820 242,820242,820 SERAF Repayment1,000,000 1,500,000 1,600,000900,000 Total Projected Resources$11,278,631 $ 8,642,516 $ 9,388,522 $ 13,474,434 $ 17,700,867 $ 21,268,440 Average Administrative Expenditures597,747 615,680 634,150 653,174 672,770 692,953 SERAF Loan900,000 2,800,000 Landings II Loan4,000,000 Total Projected Expenditures$ 5,497,747 $ 3,415,680 $ 634,150 $ 653,174 $ 672,770 $ 692,953 Projected Ending Fund Balance $ 5,780,884 $ 5,226,837 $ 8,754,372 $ 12,821,260 $ 17,028,097 $ 20,575,487 49 San Diego County Cities  San Diego • Poway • National City • Other California Cities  50