My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2019-06-24 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
AgdaPkt 2019-06-24 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2020 3:41:57 PM
Creation date
6/20/2019 6:01:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
6/24/2019
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
791
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6.S. - Page 49 of 61 <br />REDWOOD CITY GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN <br />maintain the public -realm landscaping in the area. The landscape staff used to <br />maintain this landscaping can be trained in GI maintenance practices and <br />qualified in sustainable landscaping services. <br />Infrastructure Financing Districts: Infrastructure financing districts (IFD), a <br />relatively new funding mechanism, may develop into a viable mechanism. IFDs <br />have emerged as a potential replacement for Redevelopment Agencies, which <br />were eliminated in 2012. Cities and counties may create IFDs to capture ad <br />valorem tax increments, similar to the now -defunct Redevelopment Agencies, <br />to invest within the specific IFD boundaries. IFDs are not limited to blighted <br />areas and can directly, or through 30 -year bonds, fund local infrastructure <br />including highways, transit water systems, sewer projects, flood control, <br />childcare facilities, libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities. However, the <br />formation of an IFD requires consent from all the impacted local agencies <br />(school districts are exempt from IFDs) and two-thirds support from eligible <br />voters within the IFD boundaries. Both of these are high hurdles, which may <br />explain why so few IFDs have been formed. In addition, IFDs cannot pay for <br />maintenance, repairs, operating costs, and services, and IFDs do not have <br />access to the school's portion of the property tax increment. <br />In 2014, the California Legislature approved the Enhanced Infrastructure <br />Financing District (EIFD) structure, in part to offer an alternative to the recently <br />banned redevelopment structure. Unlike the IFD, it does not require voter <br />approval unless bonds are to be issued. Like the IFD, the schools' portion of <br />property tax increment is not available. This financing structure may be a good <br />fit for localized areas where stormwater infrastructure and quality, and <br />particularly environmental clean-up on private properties, are major concerns. <br />An EIFD can be created with multiple municipalities, so it can span political <br />boundaries making it a good fit for a watershed approach to GI funding. <br />RWC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN <br />38 JUNE 2019 <br />ATTY/RESO.0075/CC RESO APPROVING THE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN — EXHIBIT A <br />REV: 06-20-19 PR <br />261 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.