My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2013-01-28
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
AgdaPkt 2013-01-28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2015 4:29:34 PM
Creation date
1/24/2013 6:45:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency
Date
1/28/2013
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.
/
807
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
6.1.F. - Page 96 , <br /> Notes to the Basic Financial Statements <br /> For the year ended June 30, 2012 <br /> NOTE 14—DISSOLUTION OF THE REDWOOD CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY <br /> As part of the FY 2011/12 State Budget package, and in an effort to help solve the State's budget <br /> problems, the California legislature enacted and the Governor signed two companion bills addressing <br /> redevelopment, AB X1 26 (Dissolution Act) and AB X1 27 (Voluntary Program Act), which took effect on <br /> June 29, 2011. <br /> The Dissolution Act immediately suspended all new redevelopment activities and incurrence of <br /> indebtedness, and eliminated redevelopment agencies as of October 1, 2011. <br /> The Voluntary Program Act allows the community that created the redevelopment agency to avoid <br /> dissolution by opting to pay a substantial community remittance beginning FY 2011/12 and each year <br /> thereafter. <br /> On July 18, 2011, the California Redevelopment Association, the League of California Cities, and others <br /> filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate in the Supreme Court of the State of California (California <br /> Redevelopment Association, et al. v. Ana Matosantos, et al., Case No. 5194861), challenging the <br /> constitutionality of the companion bills, the Dissolution Act, and the Voluntary Program Act, on behalf of <br /> cities, counties, and redevelopment agencies, and requesting a stay of their enforcement. <br /> On December 29, 2011, the California Supreme Court upheld the Dissolution Act and found the <br /> Voluntary Program Act to be unconstitutional and extended the date of dissolution to February 1, 2012. <br /> The Dissolution Act provides that upon dissolution of a redevelopment agency, either the city or another <br /> unit of local government will agree to serve as the "successor agency" to hold the assets until they are <br /> distributed to other units of state and local government. The City Council elected to become Successor <br /> Agency on August 22, 2011 with resolution 15141, and reconfirmed this action on January 23, 2012 with <br /> resolution 15164. <br /> Under the Dissolution Act, redevelopment agencies in the State of California cannot enter into new <br /> projects, obligations, or commitments. Subject to the control of a newly established oversight board, <br /> remaining assets can only be used to pay enforceable obligations in existence at the date of dissolution <br /> (including the completion of any unfinished projects that were subject to legally enforceable contractual <br /> commitments). <br /> In FY 2010/11, prior to AB X1 26 becoming law, $3.3 million of real property assets (vacant land) were <br /> transferred from the RDA's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund to the City in an attempt to protect <br /> these assets from being diverted for the benefit of the State. AB X1 26, however, specifically disallowed <br /> such transfers. Accordingly, the assets were transferred to the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset <br /> Fund in FY 2011/12. <br /> As the successor agency, the City transferred certain non housing assets to the successor agency Private <br /> Purpose Trust Fund on February 1, 2012, along with the long-term debt of the former redevelopment <br /> agency. These transfers have been recorded as an extraordinary item. <br /> 68 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.