...and there goes redevelopment money for Pacifica.
From the Office of Governor Jerry Brown, 6/30/11. "Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today signed the 2011-12 California State Budget (SB 87), dropping General Fund spending to the lowest level in decades, returning authority to local government and closing the state’s $26.6 billion deficit.
The budget makes substantial cuts to government programs and reduces
state spending by $15 billion. As a result, California’s General Fund
spending—as a share of the economy—is now at its lowest level since
1972-73. The budget also takes critical steps to address the state’s
long-term fiscal challenges by eliminating more than three-quarters of
the structural deficit, putting in-place a $500 million reserve and
making a commitment to secure stable funding for core services moving
forward.“This is an honest but painful budget that returns California’s General Fund spending to levels unseen since the 1970s. We’ve cut our deficit by $15 billion dollars and achieved financial balance this year. This is a huge step forward. But California’s long-term stability depends on our willingness to continue to pay down debt and live within our means,” said Governor Brown.
The budget recognizes that, since the May Revision, California’s tax revenues have continued to increase, providing billions of dollars to help close the budget gap and fund education under Proposition 98. Current projections are that $4 billion in revenue will be collected during the next fiscal year. As a safeguard, however, if these revenues are not realized, billions of dollars in additional cuts will be triggered to maintain a balanced budget.
The mix of cuts and revenue allow Governor Brown to maintain two key budgetary priorities, protecting K-12 education and funding the historic realignment initiative. Realignment stops the revolving door in California’s state prison system by making lower-level offenders eligible for incarceration, alternative sanctions and supervision at the local level, which is believed to be far more effective. Realignment is supported by the state’s police chiefs, peace officers, sheriffs and probation officers.
The budget includes $23.8 million in line-item vetoes. The 2011-2012 California State Budget, in full, is available at: www.ebudget.ca.gov."
Reference - CA budget newspaper articles
Sacramento Bee, - Los Angeles Times, - Silicon Valley Mercury News.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
45 comments:
If ever a town needed RDA funds it's Pacifica. Blight and negligence from one end to the other.
That 25 year window of opportunity just slammed shut for good. 25 years of lame excuses, petty squabbles, lousy leadership. You know who to thank.
The Pacifica environmental "no growth" gift just keeps on giving.
They're just much better politicians and bureaucrats. Better strategists and better at building alliances. The other side just keeps shooting itself in the foot. Still, we can hope.
What has Pacifica done with redevelopment zones in the last 5, 10, 20, 30 years?
Leadership? Why not look at a community who loves to fight! So much so they drive off any potential investor and attack anyone who tries to make the slightest improvement. What is wrong with Pacifica? We need to take a hard look in the mirror.
Happy 4th!! It's called democracy. Vote for who and what you want then whine about the results. Gotta love it!
"Vote for who and what you want then whine about the results."
Anon 6:07 PM, no one voted for a failed city, except those of you aware of that "master plan" that is.
There was a plan?
"There was a plan?
Anonymous 7:05 PM, INSIDER, not public.
we don't need no stinking plan!!
"we don't need no stinking plan!!
Whatever that means, duh. Ts that like we don't need a map for a drive to Los Angeles, Colorado, New York or St. Louis?
you did not get the memo
Build more trails and the masses will come!!
"Build more trails and the masses will come!!"
"Free sandwich at the end of the trail", sure I got that memo, and we're just waiting for the dough to roll-in. Trails are another city council majority contributing economic exit plan.
Yeah, our economy has definitely exited.
The calm before the storm. You aint seen nothing yet.
This is how Pacifica Lives!
Gosh, brilliant discussion here.
yes, blissfully content-free
"Trails are another city council majority contributing economic exit plan."
meeh, meeh, meeh. speaky english?
From one Anonymous to another Anonymous 8:42, among the current preferred choice of Anonymous postings-- don't credit an actual name with my 10:18 comment. For you, try "no growth" causing city failure.
I can't follow any of this. What are you people saying?
"What are you people saying?"
Anonymous, that's why being Anonymous makes no sense-- its like muttering to yourself.
The article is about the California budget passing, and with that Redevelopment Agencies are no longer funded. After 25 years, Pacifica Redevelopment Agency (Rockaway Quarry development) hardly got started. This was another available Pacifica opportunity thrown in the trash can.
It's impossible for Kathy to remain anonymous... No one else butchers the English language like that.
I can butcher the English language with the best of them. We all have our own style of writing and I can always understand what Kathy means. Have a safe and happy 4TH of July.
RDA's are not funded by the State budget. RDA's are funded by private sector bank loans using assumed future revenues from private development projects in RDA areas.
RDA's take a much larger percentage of property tax revenues from RDA project zones at the expense of local schools, county governments and the state. The tax revenue increases for RDA areas means those monies are not going to your local school districts.
Tom (647), thanks for the reminder to all of us to stay safe and happy today.
On the other hand, "...No one else butchers the English..." Really, Anonymous (340am) who cares? Only you.
RDA's are funded using bonds issued by the RDA, rather than private sector bank loans. Todd, you're assuming that without a redevelopment agency as a catalyst for economic development, there would be something on that land generating substantial tax revenues, which isn't usually the case.
RDA's are, or were, what localities make of them. As usual, Pacifica blew it. Ours cost us more money than we took in. Other cities use their RDA's wisely to generate revenues.
The City of Pacifica "loaned" our RDA some money at least a couple of million. I believe that the money and or payments have never been paid back. What is the status of those funds. If the RDA is gone there is no entity to pay back the money therefore a loss to the City. I would assume that the state is not assuming the obligation. Does anyone know the status
As I understand it RDA's issue bonds (and incur debt) with the aim of using that money to "revitalize" a specified zone. The RDA gets to keep the whole subsequent property tax that is above and beyond what that zone was paying prior to the redevelopment. Hopefully this is enough to repay the bonds issued. Sometimes, as in Pacifica's case, it's not.
I put "revitalize" in quotes because some communities have been playing fast and lose with the term -- declaring vast swaths of property Redevelopment Zones -- when the area just needs new sidewalks or a coat of paint, not because it's blighted in the commonly understood sense. Of course, the community gets to keep a lot of tax-generated revenue this way.
As Todd alluded to, the abuse has been such that public school funding has been taking a hit due to the popularity of RDA's and the State passed legislation requiring that RDA's set aside a certain amount of tax revenue for this purpose. Compliance has been spotty though.
RDA's are a complicated mess and their success has been debatable. I wonder if there's a mechanism in place to assist cities left holding a bag of debt under existing (and now dismantled) RDA's like Pacifica.
Todd (931) very good. So, with no RDA funding this year that's why there was a 1+% increase in property tax income this year.
Here's an easy description of how RDA works from a City of Long Beach document. The property reassessment fee goes into redevelopment. So without using the money, that assessment increase flows "out of the City to other areas and agencies." Guess that's what Pacifica has been doing for 25 years, "not the brightest bulb...".
Now property assessments are down, and there are mortgage defaults, hence redevelopment can't afford self-fund. But, redevelopment became law approved by CA voters in 1951 to "address blight in urban areas". So, what is the future for redevelopment? In the news, a lawsuit will be (by the cities I think). Then what?
Jerry Browns new law allows RDA's to continue paying off debt on existing projects and once that is done... that is it. No debt, no RDA.
The following are the CA "redevelopment reform" bills passed... guess we can stop thinking about that word "reform" as improvement.
ABx1 26 (Blumenfield) – Redevelopment #1: "Abolishes redevelopment agencies and sets up a “successor agency” to administer the agency’s shutdown. For specifics, please see Redevelopment story."
ABx1 27 (Blumenfield) – Redevelopment #2: "Allows redevelopment agencies to continue if specified payments to schools, fire protection agencies, and transit agencies are made."
This information is from Mission Courier Times, San Diego 6/15/11.
Thanks Kathy.
Todd, I'm glad you bring-up important issues. I just posted yesterday's article about San Jose (the second largest redevelopment agency). The article does reference Gov Brown putting the redevelopment issue on the table in January. Brown has offered the cities a possible not-so-affordable redevelopment "deal". The San Jose article talks about that.
Pacifica had a chance for redevelopment but they blew it.
Thus they don't need to get any of the tax benefit..
Build trails and they shall come in the battle cry of the Pacifica City Council.
The 3 remaining stooges did a great job burying the town in tons of debt.
The Pacifica general fund is owed $5+million by the RDA.
The three builders who built the area have benefited, but the public was sold a bill of goods.
We will never see that money paid back.
The city misused RDA funds the way it misused sewer tax funds. It issued RDA bonds, and instead of investing the money in redevelopment, it used the money for day-to-day operations. We never developed anything capable of paying the bondholders back, so now that money has to come from the general fund.
The area around Oceana HS sounds like a war zone tonight. If the fines are $1000 per fireworks violation, Pacifica could collect enough money to pay its bills for five years.
"The city misused RDA funds the way it misused sewer tax funds."
Dang, Steve (951), an Anonymous on the San Jose Redevelopment post would think our city council scamming the citizens of this city on a "marginally legal" basis is just swell, because for those additional fees and taxes we also get NOTHING.
Quiet in Linda Mar/Park Pacifica area from about 11:15pm. Kind of a usual 4th of July here, except for what seems to have been a greater number of noisy illegal bombs.
Not a cop in sight last night in Bagdad Lindamar. Yeee!!!!
Get used to it. Seems likely the county sheriff's will take over in a year or so since Pacifica's broke and getting broker. Whole new ballgame then.
Todd
CRA Community Reinvestment Act is paid for by banks and the govermnent for lenders to loan money in areas to spruce up areas. The Gov't has a mandate that lenders must loan x percent of the loan money in these areas
RDA's are set up the city to take change blighted and under utalized areas. In which the city can keep more of the tax money and use eminent domain to redevelop zones of the city.
Say wha?
Say wha? Must be a Lindamartian deafened by the 4th's artillery barrage.
Poor little Pacifica never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
We all owe Council and their poverty loving, faux-enviro sycophants a big thank you for making sure that the quarry remains the biggest kitty litter box in the state.
Squatters, too.
Post a Comment