HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04231985 - 1.67 T�: - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ra
FROM: P h_i I B_a t c h_e I ort
Exec.ut i_ve D i.rector Costa
DATE: Apr i. 1 50 1935 ��
SUBJECT: Legislation : Assemb-ly BA- 11-1, 1A-73
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) a: BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMME.NDAT I.ON
Adopt a pos i:t i on in oppos i,t i:on to Assemb-1 y B.i: l l 147.3 by Assembly
Member Stirling requiring redevelopment agencies to share tax
increments with school districts under certain circumstances .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Potential loss of .up to 27 percent of tax increment revenues in the
Pleasant Hill BART Redevelopment Project . Reduction of available
funds in projects being contemplated . May lengthen the time period
for ending existing city projects whithin the County and the return
of full property tax to all local taxing agencies .
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND
Existing law generally permits an agency to pay to any taxing agency
with. territory located within a project area , including school districts ,
any amount of money which the agency finds is necessary and appropriate
to alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused to that taxing
agency by a redevelopment project . Existing law also permits a
redevelopment agency to pay for Land or buildings that are publicly
owned , under certain circumstances .
This bill would permit a school district with territory located
within a project area to adopt a resolution requesting the
redevelopment agency to utilize tax increment funds to redevelop
school buildings , facilities , structures , or other improvements .
If a school district adopts that resolution , the bill would require
the agency to amend the redevelopment plan and to utilize, for those
purposes , the amount of tax increment funds which the school district
would have otherwise received if the redevelopment plan did not
contain a provision for the allocation of tax increment funds . T.he
bill would impose a state-mandated local program by imposing this'
requirement upon redevelopment agencies .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION OF AGENCY CO ITTEE
X APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF AGENCY QN APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOP-
MENT AGENCY ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED 011?5
Redevelopment Agency PHI BATCHELOR, AGENCY SECRETARY
Auditor-Controller
CSAC
M362/7-83 BY - DEPUTY
;1
Legislation : Assembly Bill 1473
April 5, 1985
Page 2
Assembly Bill 1473 should be opposed for the following reasons :
1.. It undermines the redevelopment process by reducing the funds
available for project implementation . After the 20 percent
set-aside for housing and required pass throughs this measure
could reduce net revenues to the Agency by 50 percent .
2 . It could specifically reduce tax increments in the Pleasant
Hill BART Project by 27 percent .
3 . It may. unreasonably lengthen all redevelopment projects
thereby lengthening the time for debt repayment and the
return of full property tax to local taxing agencies .
4 . Redevelopment Law already provides a mechanism by which
agencies (. ie . school districts ) can be allocated tax
increments to alleviate any financial burden or detriment
caused by the redevelopment project .
5 . This bill gives virtually unilateral authority to school
districts to require a share of tax increment revenues .
6 . If passed this bill could open the door to- other special
interest and agencies to tap the tax increment funding
mechanism.
TAP: krc