HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10201987 - 2.2 TO, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS "' 002
:F"°"' Phil. Batchelor, Contra
County AdministratorCosta
DATE: October 8, 1987 COl1ly
SUBJECT;
LOSS TO REDEVELOPMENT
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) -& BACKGROUND.AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION•
Receive the attached report from the Auditor-Controller..
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
This report indicates .that $28 .8 million in . property. tax dollars . is going
to redevelopment agencies in Contra Costa County. The County general
fund' s share of . this lost revenue is $7,013,807 for 1987-88.
BACKGROUND: ..
Each year, the Auditor prepares a report .which shows .how much property'tax
increment each redevelopment agency in the County receives. The money is
received' as the result ofreduction in the taxes the other taxing agencies
in the redevelopment., area. These other taxing agencies have their share of
the _ growth in' .taxes frozen or. reduced as a result of the redevelopment.
agency' s presence. This year' s . report. `indicates that $28, 863, 403 will be
lost by taxing agencies . in 1.987-88, ,an increase of 2.7 .9% from the amount in
1986-87 .
The County general fund.. looses over. $7 million to redevelopment areas. Of
this amount, only $179,026 or 2. 5% is going to the County' s own
redevelopment agency.. Other; Board governed agencies loose a total of
$2,768, 841 countywide; $70,652 of which is to the . County redevelopment
agency.
The significant increases .in the amounts taken from the various agencies.
address . the need to approach each new project aggressively, so as to .
minimize the future detrimental impact on the County. Unfortunately, there
is no way in .which to open negotiations on projects which are .already
established, so further future year drains are anticipated from this
.source.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: .YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION M BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE - - OTHER
SIGNATURE i S :
ACTION OF BOARD ON October 20, 1967 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
ACCEPTED the report; directed that the report be. transmitted to..the County. Supervisors
Association of California (CSAC) , the County's legislative delegation and lobbyist, and.
all'news media; requested staff to communicate with the cities on this matter; and
directed the County Administrator to pursue legislation to identify•a portion of the
redevelopment revenue for provision .of services.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS 1S A. TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES; NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT; ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED October 20, 1987
y
cc: Count Administrator --
.
CSAC PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Legislative Delegation. SUPERVISORS AND'COUNT.Y ADMINISTRATOR
County's Lobbyist
Cities
Meti� Media BY. j - .,DEPUTY
DEPUTY
382/ - —�` - .
' Office of
COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER C.'4OD'!ra costa co`'
Contru Costa County RECBV-
Murtioez, CuIiforoiu
�� P1X
uv'
September 15, 1987 1��7
TO: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
Attn: Kerry E. Harms, Asst. County A i
FROM: Donald L. 80VChet, Auditor-Controller
By: Sam Kimnto, Special District-
SUBJECT: 1987-88 Redevelopment Agency InCreme°4s/Losses to Agencies
The following are being provided as you requested regarding redevelop-
ment agency tax increments and the corresponding taxing agency tax losses.
Redevelopment
Redevelopment Agency. Tax Increment
--
Antioch $ 1 ,646,928
Brentwood 175,193
Concord 9,268,826
Danville 278,746
[l Cerrito 852,081
Hercules ^ 519,903
Pleasant Hill 986,346
Pinole 2,227,800
Pittsburg 5,400,986
Richmond 2,874,828
San Pablo 3,150,352
Walnut Creek 678,681
Contra Costa County 736,735
------------'
Total
Estimated
Taxing Agency Property Tax Loss
County General $ 7,073,807
County Library 361 "241
Riverview Fire Protection District 785,000
East Diablo Fire Protection District 9,100
Contra Costa Consolidated Fire 1 ,520,000
Rodeo Fire Protection District 43,500
3on Ramon Valley Fire Protection District 50,000
All Others 19,080,755
Total
The above calculations are based only on the equalized (beginning)
assessment roll and do no include supplemental roll tax increments. For
1986-87 this amounted to additional redevelopment increments of $l ,355,476'
Of this amount, the County General Fund 's share was approximately $329,000'
3K:mp