HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06032003 - C142 ,} CONTRA
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COSTA
� CI TNTY
FROM: John Sweeten, County Administrator
IA
1;
DATE: May 15, 2003
SUBJECT: Grand Jury Report No. 0306 —Time to Redirect
the County Redevelopment Agency
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION(S):
RECEIVE the Grand Jury Report No. 0306 entitled "Time to Redirect the County Redevelopment
Agency" and REFER it to the County Administrator's Office for response.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: .,... f. ..: :x
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE—APPROVE_OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON june 3, APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS{ABSENT Nome ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
**Distr1.cct n feat VACARrw— SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:Julie Enea,Sr.Deputy CAO
ATTESTEDjune 3,2tX73
JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
cc: CAO
Redevelopment Agency EPUTY
MAY-14-2003 16:18 Contra Costa County 925 335 1098 P.02,,'08
Grand Jur 725 CoW stwt
Contra++ PO.ON 911
V Mlkt b*2, CA "M-OCNI
County
May 14,2003
Mark De Saulnier,Chair
Board of Supervisors
651 ,Pine Street
Martinez,CA 94553
ilear Supervisor De Saulnier:
Attached is a copy of Grand Jury Report No.0306,Time to Redirect the County Redevelopment
Agency prepared by the 2002-2003 Contra Costa Grand fury.
In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05,this report is being provided to you at
least two working days before it is released publicly.
Section 933.5(x)of the California Government Code requires that(the responding person or
entity shall report one of the following actions)in respect to each fi
(1) "'Toes respondent agrees with the finding,"
(2) "The respondent disagrees with the finding."
(3) "The respondent partially disagrees with the finding."
In the cases of both(2)and(3)above,the respondent shall specify the portion of the finding that
is disputed,and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor.
In addition,Section 933.05(b)requires that the respondent reply to each reconmat tiotn by
stating one of the following actions:
1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary describing the implemented
action.
2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented,but will be implemented in the
future,with a time frame for implementation.
3. The recommendation requires further analysis. This response should explain the scope
and parameters of the analysis or study,and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for
discussion. This time frame shall not exceed sic months from the date of the publication
of the Grand Jury Report.
.MAY-14-2003 16:18 Contra Costa County 925 335 1038 P.03.06
Mark De Saulnier,Chair
Board of Supervisors
May 14,20013
Page 2
4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not
reasonable,with an explanation thereof.
Please be reminded that Section 933.015 specifies that no officer,agency,"department or
governing Body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prier to its public
release. Please insure that your response to the above noted Grand Jury report includes the
mandated items. We will expect your response,using the form described by the quoted
Government Code,no later than Aum,2003.
Sincerely,
C?A. ,
032-2003 Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury
cc: John Sweeten,County Administrator
MAY-14-2003 16:19 Contra Costa County 925 335 109E P.04/08
A REPORT BY
THE 2002-03 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY
725 Court Street
Martinez,Californias 94553
Report N6.U306
TIME TO R,EDERECT THE COUNTY REDEVELOPAVNT AGENCY
APPROVED BY THE GRAND JURY;
Iia#e:
AIRb A.AROSP
NS,,,,,,,._.,...�•
jURT167EMAN
ACCEPTED FOR FILING:
Date. •.
L. SPNEffA
JUDGE Of THE JUPERIOR COURT
MPY-14-2003 16=19 Contra Costa Countg 925 3M 1098 P.05/OB
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REPORT N4.0346
Time to Redirect the County Redevelopment Agency
To; The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
Tbe: goals of redevelopment are to eliminate blight,promote economic development and
provide affordable housing.
The California Community Redevelopment Law is contained in the California Health and
Safaty Code Section 33000 at seq. in 1952,California voters adopted Article;AVL
Section 16,of the California Constitution. This article provided for tare increment
financing as follows:
Base year property tax is established with the inmoduction of a
red lopment area. Schools,special districts,etc., continue to receive
the base year property taxes. With the tax base set, increaser in value of
property over time within a redevelopment area increases the property
taxes. Thi artd`itional taxes. or increments,}taw to the Redevelopment
Agency. Thisflnancing method is the key mechanismfor implementing
redevelopment law.
The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency(RDA)was established on
December 6, M. While the redevelopment law was paced in the 1950s,it was
enabling legislation,which gives the counties and cities the right to form redevelopment
t
agencies but does not mandate them to do so. However,most cities in the state now have
redevelopment agencies,while unincorporated areas witbin a county are the responsibility
of the county RDA.
There are presently four redevelopment areas in the unincorporated area of the county:
Pleasant Hill BART area established in 1984,Bay Paint in 1987,North Richmond in
1987 and Rodeo in 1990.
The Pleasant Hill HART Redevelopment Arca was explicitly designed to reduce regional
traffic by locating new offices and housing neat to a transportation hub.
This report focuses solely on the RDA's activities at the Pleasant Hill HART
redevelopment area.
FINDINGS
1. The County Board of Supervisors is the governing bard of the RDA.
2. 'I'he RDA raises capital dollars primarily through the We of tax exempt
bonds. It can incur bonded indebtedriess without voter approval.
1
MAY-14-2003 16:19 Contra Costa County 925 335 1098 P.06,'08
3. Close to 7011A of the RDA's current budget is devoted to the Pleasant Hill
BART(PH BART}redevelopment area.
4. The current indebtedness of the PH BART redevelopment project is just
over$83 million.
5. While established in 1984,the redevelopment of the PH BART area hes
not yet been completed. There is no specific timetable for the
development of the rest of the PH BART area.
6. A development company,Millennium Partners,has exclusive right to the
development of the PH BART redevelopment area.
I The RISA has purchased the Las Juntas Swim Club for the purpose of
providing palcing for BART. The RDA paid$2 sm%llion for the property
which had been appraised at S1.8 million. The appraisal states"The
Highest and Best Use of the property was determined to be to desnolish the
swim club improvements to allow residential development as allowed by
the General Plan and zoning"
S. The Swim Club property has been purchased for the use of BART parking.
BART has not agreed to pay any of the costs sof improvement of the
property far"parking,estimated at$590,000,nor for its on-going
maintenance.
9. Assembly Bill 1855(AB 1855)was passed in 2000 to allow the RDA to
buy the Las Juntas property which is outside the redevelopment area and
within the city limits of Walnut Creek.
AB 1955 permits this property to be used solely for the purpose of
constructing affordable housing. AB 1855 says:
"The funds shall be used only for the acquisition of land
for,and the design and construction of,the developnumt of
Dousing containing units affordable to low-or moderate-
income persons."
10. The request flrom the Bsowd of Supervisors asking various Senators and
bly persons to support the bill did not reveal thsss tlae purchm
would be for parking,but stressed affordable housing.
11. AB 1855 also grants permission for the RDA to use its funds outside the
redevelopment sur'ea"anywhere in the unincorporated temttoty" for the
"Provision of low and moderate-income housing".
2
MAY-14-2003 16-'19 Contra Costa County 925 335 1098 P.07/08
12. The RDA also has plans to build a$25 million patking garage for BART
on BART property. When it has been completed,RDA glares to give
ownership of the garage to BART without payment.
13. The RISA is planning to build a bridge over Treat Blvd.fat Jones Road)
for easier pedestrian and bicycle access to the BART station at a cost
estimated to be S4 million.
14. Thera has been apposition by residents in the surrounding areas to bath the
use of the Las Juntas Swim Club for BART parking and the construction
of the bridge over Treat Blvd.
15. Affordable lousing goals as required by RDA law,have been met by
subsidizing rusts in apartment complexes within the PFI BART
redevelopment area.
16. There has been no owner-occupied,affordable housing built within this
redevelopment area.
17. Healtkt and Safety Codes 33421 and 33445 arc cited by the RDA as its
authority for the actions it proposes to take within the redevelopment area.
CONCLUSIONS
NS
1. The County Redevelopment Agency is a separate legal entity with its own
revenue,budget;staff and power to issue debt and condemn property.
2. Redevelopment law,specifically Health and Safety Codes 33421 and
33445,is being interpreted liberally by the RDA to justify its decisions and
actions.
3. The continued development of the PH BART area is moving very slowly
under the agreement with Millennium Partners.
4. The obligation for providing parking for the convenience of BART and its
riders lies with BART and/or Millennium Partners,not with the RD&
5. The use of$25 million in redevelopment fands to build a parking garage
on BART property is inappropriate. Again,parking for its riders should be
BAR.T's obligation. If parking is displaced by a developer,it should also
be the responsibility of that developer to replace it.
6. AS 1855 does.not;give the RISA authority to acquire the Las Juntas Swim
Club property for the purpose of BART parking.,
7. The expenditures of$2.6 million of redevelopment flrrtds to provide
BART parking on to swim club site is inappropriate.
3
MAY-14-2003 16:20 Contra Costa County 925 3M 1698 P.09/06
S. The expenditure of some$4 million for a bridge over Treat Blvd.is
improper. Whatever the increase in pedestrian or bicycle traffic,the
building of the bridge is not an appropriate use of redevelopment dollars,
9. A mom proper use of these funds would be to provide more low-and
moderate-income housing either within the PH BART redevelopment area
or elsewhere within the county as permitted by AB 1855.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends the following actions to the Contra
Costa County Board of Supervisors as the governing board of the RDA,
1. Since the purchase Of the Las Juntas Swire Club,property has been
gnalW*use the property as AB 1855 intended,for multi-family
affordable housing,
Z. to not spend,any redevelopment dollars to tum the Swim Club property
into a parking lot.
3. Do not build the parking garage for SART.
4, Do not proceed fiuthenr with plus to build the bridge over Treat Blvd.
5< Redirect the monies designated for BART parking and the Treat bridge
into low-and mode rate-home housing within the PH BART
redevelopment area or elsewhere within the unincorporated territory of the
county.
6, The Board of Supervisors,in its capacity as the Redevelopment Agency
Board of Directors closely supervise the Redevelopment Agency to insure
that this agency is spending redevelopment money in prudent and
appropriate ways and in the best interest of the public.
4
TOTAL, P.0(3