SA SR 20151104 C - RDA Dissolution Status and UpdateCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE RANCHO
PALOSVERDESREDEVELOPMENTAGENCY
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
DEBORAH CULLEN, FINANCE OFFICER
NOVEMBER 4, 2015
REDEVELOPMENT DISSOLUTION STATUS AND UPDATE
DOUG WILLMORE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR "tAN
Staff Coordinator: Kathryn Downs, Deputy Director of Finance rt{)
RECOMMENDATION
Direct Staff to prepare a Last and Final Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule, to be
considered by the Oversight Board in February 2016, and forwarded to the California
Department of Finance by March 1, 2016.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Dissolution Status
Since the former Redevelopment Agency (RDA) was dissolved on January 31, 2012, the
following steps have been completed to wind down the business of redevelopment.
1. The City elected to become the Successor Agency to the RDA, with the City
Council serving as the Successor Agency Board.
2. The City elected to assume the housing function and assets.
3. Surplus cash was remitted to the county for distribution to the taxing entities.
4. Real property owned by the former RDA was transferred to the City, as approved
by the state .
5. The City's consolidated loan became an enforceable obligation of the Successor
Agency; and small loan repayments began in FY14-15, based upon a dissolution
law formula.
The steps of dissolution that have not yet been completed follow .
1
REDEVELOPMENT DISSOLUTION STATUS AND UPDATE
November 4, 2015
Page 2 of 4
1. Continued disposition of the Portuguese Bend Club Homeowners' Association
note receivable (balance of $54,932 at June 30, 2015 with payoff expected August
2016).
2. Continued repayment of the former RDA's debt to the county using proceeds from
the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (balance of $4,655,000 at June 30,
2015 with payoff expected December 2027 per the bond debt service schedule).
3. Continued repayment of the former RDA's debt to the City (balance and repayment
discussed below).
New Redevelopment Dissolution Law
The California Department of Finance (DOF) actively pursued new legislation related to
redevelopment dissolution in 2015. Proposed legislation went through a number of
amendments in March, May and June. On the last day of the 2015 legislative session a
new bill was put into print, and passed by the legislature . The Governor signed the bill
on September 22, 2015, and it became effective immediately.
Staff and legal counsel have reviewed the new law, and identified the following impacts
to Rancho Palos Verdes.
• The interest on City loans must be recalculated using a simple interest rate of 3%
(fiscal impact discussed below).
• The switch from local oversight boards to county oversight boards will occur July
1, 2018 (formerly July 1, 2016); and the Rancho Palos Verdes Oversight Board for
redevelopment dissolution will cease to exist at that time.
• Beginning FY16-17, the cycle of reporting obligations and actual financial data will
become annual (currently it is bi-annual).
• Successor Agencies will have the option to produce a "Last and Final Recognized
Obligation Payment Schedule" (ROPS). If the Last and Final ROPS is approved
by the DOF :
o Annual ROPS will no longer be submitted to the DOF for approval;
o City loans will be recalculated using a simple interest rate of 4% (vs. 3%,
noted above); and
o Repayments of City loans will be subject to a different formula, which may
result in larger repayment installments for Rancho Palos Verdes (discussed
further below).
City's Consolidated Loan -Impact of New Law
Previously, dissolution law required the interest on City loans to be recalculated using the
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) rate. The DOF and many agencies (including
RPV) disagreed on the interpretation of that clause. The DOF interpretation required
interest calculation to be based on the rate earned by LAIF during the quarter in which
the Oversight Board approved the City loan . For RPV, that would have been 0.264%.
Staff's interpretation was to use the historical LAIF rates earned over the life of the loan,
2
REDEVELOPMENT DISSOLUTION STATUS AND UPDATE
November 4, 2015
Page 3 of 4
which were as high as 8% in 1991. The City of Glendale took the same position as RPV
Staff, litigated the matter, and won a judgment against the DOF. The new dissolution law
noted above negates that judgement; and requires loans to be recalculated using simple
interest of 3%. If RPV elects to prepare a Last and Final ROPS, the loan will be
recalculated using simple interest of 4%. The following table summarizes the accrued
interest and loan balance at June 30 , 2015 for each scenario .
Acc r ue d Ci ty loan
Prin cipal Inte rest 6/30/l.5 Bala n ce
Prior to New Law
DOF Interpretation $ 6,669,861 $ 342,392 $ 7,012,253
City Interpretation $ 6,669,861 $5,378,030 $ 12,047,891
After New Law
3% Interest $ 6,669,861 $3,787,204 $ 10,457,065
4% Interest $ 6,669,861 $5,049,605 $ 11,719,466
As a Last and Final ROPS has not yet been prepared or approved by the DOF, the June
30, 2015 financial statements will reflect a loan balance of $10,457 ,065, based upon the
3% simple interest accrual. If a Last and Final ROPS is prepared and approved, the loan
balance will be adjusted to $11, 719,466 to reflect the 4% simple interest accrual.
City Loan Re paym ent -Potential Benefit of Last and Final ROPS
Previous dissolution law included the following repayment formula for City loans : prior
year residual distribution of Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF, formerly
referred to as tax increment) to taxing entities, less base year (FY12-13) distribution of
RPTTF to taxing entities, divided by 2. This repayment formula is still applicable if a Last
and Final ROPS is not prepared.
If a Last and Final ROPS is prepared, the City's loan may be repaid using a formula
included in the new dissolution law: fifteen percent of RPTTF after enforceable
obligations are paid .
Calculation without Last and Final ROPS Calculation with Last and Final ROPS
Estimated FY17-18 RPTTF $1, 773,611
Base Year 2012-13 Residual State & County Fees (47,205)
Distribution to Taxing Entities $ Enforceable Obligations
FY14-15 Residual Distribution to County Bond Payments (438,000)
Taxing Entities $ 95,770 Subtotal $1,288,406
Difference $ 95,770 Multiply by 15%
Divide by 2 =City Loan Theoretical FY17-18 City Loan
Repayment FYl.5-16 $ 47,885 Repayment $ 193,261
3
REDEVELOPMENT DISSOLUTION STATUS AND UPDATE
November 4, 2015
Page 4 of 4
Using the new formula appears to result in a more favorable repayment to the City.
In either case (old law or new law), 20% of the repayment must be deposited into the
City's Low-Moderate Income Housing Fund, and the remaining 80% is deposited to the
City's General Fund. The June 30, 2015 available balance of the City's Low-Moderate
Income Housing Fund was $45,941. The City has used its affordable housing money in
the past to extend a loan to a developer for a senior housing project, which included
affordable units. The City also used affordable housing money to purchase
condominiums, and re-sell them to low-moderate income persons . The City does not
have the authority to re-purpose the fund, or change the state law that requires 20% of
the City's loan repayment to be deposited into the fund.
Additional Information with Potential Impact to City Loan Repayment -County Deferred
Tax Increment
As part of the 1987 Horan Agreement, the County received a 50.9% share of tax
increment generated in the project area. In 1997, as part of the debt restructuring, the
County agreed to defer its 50.9% share of tax increment "to the extent necessary to pay
principal and/or interest on the RDA Bond and to satisfy the amount due to the County".
The County resumed collecting its 50.9% share of tax increment in FY13-14. The total
balance of tax increment deferred from 1997 to 2013 was $8,334,394 .
The $8.3 million of deferred tax increment will ultimately be repaid from RPTTF. However,
there is currently no repayment schedule; and we do not yet know how the County will
repay itself from RPTTF, or how this may impact the loan repayment formula noted above.
One potential option is that the County will repay itself from the balance of RPTTF
remaining after the County bonds are paid . This would result in the City receiving no
repayments until the $8.3 million of deferred tax increment is repaid in full.
Long-Term Estimate of Enforceable Obligation Repayment
Staff has prepared three 40-year illustrations of RPTTF (FY15-16 through FY54-55),
attached to this report. The summary of results follows.
Scenario 1
RPTIF annual increase assumption
Includes repayment of County Deferred Tax Increment
Potential years to repay City Loan
Attachments
A-40-Year Illustration of RPTTF -Scenario 1 (page 5)
B -40-Year Illustration of RPTTF -Scenario 2 (page 6)
C -40-Year Illustration of RPTTF -Scenario 3 (page 7)
3%
No
38
Scenario 2 Scenario 3
5% 5%
No Yes
30 37
4
40-Year Illustration of RPTTF -Scenario 1 Attachment A
I I I I I I I I I I 1
County Sr.a te Conu:oller County Are District County Bond Impound Dlstflbuted Tobi Distributed Tobi Oty Loan
Admln Fees 121 OveJslchl Fee. (21 hS!S-lhru 150.9'41 hS'S-lhru 117%1 Repayments Aaounl(SI to RPV for ROPS to Taxing Entitles 131 RPTTF (11 (21 Repayment (41
FY12-13 Actual I 28,394 I I 256,199 I 370,250 949,444 273,017 1,507,054
FY13-14 Actual 31,816 -755 ,997 252,494 378,875 (83,015) 252,364 275,603 1,485,259
FY14-15 Actual 32,987 10,212 826,161 275,928 391,625 (391,625) 477,818 1,623,105 72,916
FY15-16 Est imate 33,976 10,519 850,945 284,206 408,250 (408,250) 492.152 1,671,798 47,885
FY16-17 Est imate 34,996 10,834 876,474 292,732 418,750 (229,894) 318,061 1,721,95 ~ 223,090 -·-FY17·18 Estimate 36,045 11,159 902.768 301,514 438,000 84,124 1,773,611 193,261
FY18-19 Est imate 37,127 11,494 929,851 310,559 450,875 -86,913 1,826,819 199,098
FY19-20 Estimate 38,241 11,839 957,746 319,876 462,500 -91.422 1,881,624 205,3 57
FY20-21 Estimate 39,388 12,194 986,479 329,472 477,750 . -92,789 1,938,072 211,311
FY21-22 Estimate 40,569 12,560 1,016,073 339,356 496,375 --91,280 1,996,215 217.007
FY22-23 Esti mate 41,787 12,937 1,046,555 349,537 513,250 -92,035 2,056,101 223,219
FY23-24 Estimate 43,040 13,325 1,077,952 360,023 528,375 -95,069 2,117,784 229,957
FY24-25 Estimate 44,331 13,725 1,110,291 370,824 541,750 -100,397 2,181,318 237,227
FY25·26 Estimate 45,661 14,136 1.143,599 381.949 563,125 98,286 2,246,757 243 ,575
FY26-27 Estimate 47,031 14,560 1,177,907 393,407 577,375 -103,879 2.314.160 251.279
FY27-28 Estimate 48,442 14,997 1,213,245 405,209 594,500 107,191 2,383,585 258,847
FY28-29 Estimate 49,895 15,447 1,249,642 417,366 -722,742 2,455,092 358,462
FY29-30 Estimate 51,392 15,911 1,287,131 429,887 744,424 2,528,745 369,216
FY30-31 Est im ate 52,934 16,388 1,325,745 442,783 -766,757 2,604,607 380,293
FY31-32 Estimate 54,522 16,880 1,365,517 456,067 789,760 2,682,746 391,702
FY32-33 Estimate 56,158 17,386 1,406,483 469,749 813,453 2,763,228 I 403,453
FY33-34 Est imate 57,842 17,908 1,448,678 483,841 -837,856 2,846,125 415,55 ~ ---------. -f--FY34-35 Estimate 59,578 18,445 1,492,138 498,356 862,992 2,931,509 428,023
FY35-36 Estimate 61,365 18,998 1,536,902 513,307 -888,882 3,019,454 440,864
FY36-37 Estimate 63,206 19,568 1,583,009 528,706 915,548 3,110,037 454,090
FY37-38 Estimate 65,102 20,155 1,630,499 544,568 -943,015 3,203,338 467,712
FY38-39 Est imate 67,055 20,760 1,679,414 560,905 -971,305 3,299,439 481,744
FY39-40 Estimate 69,067 21,382 1,729,797 577,732 --l,000,444 3,398,422 496,196
FY40-41 Estimate 71,139 22,024 1,781,691 595,064 1,030,457 3,500,374 511,082
FY41-42 Estimate 73,273 22,685 1,835,141 612,916 ---1,061,371 3,605,386 526,414
FY42-43 Estimate 75,471 23,365 1,890,196 631,303 -1,093,212 3,713,547 542,207
FY43-44 Estimate 77,735 24,066 1,946,901 650,242 -1,126,009 3,824,954 558,473
FY44-45 Estimate 80,067 24,788 2,005,308 669,749 -. -1,159,789 3,939,702 575,227
FY45-46 Est imate 82,469 25 ,532 2,065.468 689,842 --l ,194,583 4,057,893 592,484
FY46-47 Estimate 84,943 26,298 2,127.432 710,537 -1,230,420 4,179,630 610,258
FY47-48 Estimate 87,492 27,087 2,191,255 731,853 -1,267,333 4,305,019 628,566
FY48-49 Estimate 90,116 27,899 2,256,992 753,809 . 1,305,353 4,434,170 647,423
FY49-50 Est imate 92,820 28,736 2,324,702 776,423 . -1.344,513 4,567,195 666,846
FY50-51 Estimate 95,605 29,598 2,394,443 799,716 1,384,849 4,z_D4,211 _68~._1!51 -FY51-52 Estim ate 98,473 30,486 2,466,276 823,707 l,426,394 4,845,337 707,457
FY52-53 Est imate 101.427 31,401 2,540,265 848,418 -1,469,186 4,990,697 124,600
FY53-54 Estimat e 104,470 32,343 2,616,473 873,871 -1,513,261 5,140,418 .
FY54-55 Estimate 107,604 33,313 2,694,967 900,087 --1.558.659 5,294,630 .
Notes:
(1) Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund
(2) Assumption is annual 3% increase for RPITF and Fees.
(3} Total Distributed to Taxing Entities -Includes prior period adjustments and residual distributions.
(4) Oty Loan Repayment -FY14-15 & FYlS-16 are based on prier law. If Last and Final ROPS is apprOlled, the paym.,nt formula change• in FY16-17.
{51 Per the terms of the 1997 MOU, the County previously Impounded tax increment to make bond payments. FY12-13 was the last year proP"rtv tax was Impounded. At June 30, 2015 th" balance
o f the Impound account (a prepaid item on the Successor Agency's general ledger) was S638,144. Th eoce.tlcally, the impound account would be used to make bond payments until the $638,144 is
exhausted.
5
40-Year Illustration of RPTTF -Scenario 2 I Attachment B
I I I I I I I I I I I
County State Controller County Fire District County Bond Impound Distributed Total Distributed Total Qty loan
Admln F-.1 (21 OvefSlght Fee (21 Pillss-Thru (SO.WI l'illss-Thru (17"1 Repayments Aaount(SI to RPV for ROI'S ta Taxing Entitles (31 RPTTf (lJ (21 Repayment (41
FY12-13 I Actual I 28,394 -256,199 370,250 949,444 I 273,017 -1,501,054 I
FY13-14 Actual 31,816 755,997 252,494 378,875 (83,015) 252,364 275,603 1,485,259
FY14-15 Actual 32,987 10,212 826,161 275,928 391,625 (391,625) -477,818 1,623,105 72,916
FY15-16 Estimate 33,976 10,519 867,469 289,724 408,250 (408,250) -502,573 1,704,260 47,885
FY16-17 Estimate 34,996 10,834 910,842 304,210_ 418,750 (229,894) --339,735 1,789,473 333,218 ---------.
FY17-18 Estimate 36,045 11,159 956,384 319,421 438,000 --117,937 1,878,947 209,061
FY18-19 Estimate 37,127 11.494 1,004,203 335,392 450,875 -133,803 1,972,894 221,010
FY19-20 Estimate 38,241 11,839 1,054,413 352,162 462,500 --152,385 2,071,539 233,844
FYZ0-21 Estimate 39,388 12,194 1,107,134 369,770 477,750 168,880 2,175,116 246,868
FY21-22 Estimate 40,569 12,560 1,162,491 388,258 496,375 -183,618 2,283,872 260,155
FY22-23 Estimate 41,787 12,937 1,220,615 407,671 513,250 -201,806 2,398,066 274,514
FY23-24 Estimate 43,040 13,325 1,281,646 428,055 528,375 223,528 2,517,969 289,984
FY24·25 Estimate 44.331 13,725 1,345,728 449,457 541,750 -248,875 2,643,867 306,609
FY25·26 Estimate 45,661 14,136 1,413,015 471,930 563,125 268,193 2,776,061 322,971
FY26-27 Estimate 47,031 14,560 1,483,666 495,527 577,375 296.705 2,914,864 341,385
FY27-28 Estimate 48,442 14,997 1,557,849 520,303 594,500 -324,516 3,060,607 360,400
FY28-29 Estimate 49,895 15,447 1,635,741 546,318 966,235 3,213,637 472,244
FY29-30 Estimate 51,392 15,911 1,717,528 573,634 1,015,854 3,374,319 496,052
FY30-31 Estimate 52,934 16,388 1,803,405 602,316 -1,067,992 3,543,035 521,057
FY31-32 Estimate 54,522 16,880 1,893,575 632,432 1,122.778 3,720,187 547,318
FY32-33 Estimate 56,158 17,386 1,988,254 664,053 --1,180,345 3,906,196 574,898
FY33-34 Estimate 57,842 --17,908
f--
2,087,667 697,256 --·-~240,834 4,101,506 603,863 --·--FY34-35 Estimate 59,578 18,445 2,192,050 732,119 --1.304,390 4,306,581 634,284
FY35-36 Estimate 61,365 18,998 2,301,652 768,725 -1,371,170 4,521,910 666,232
FY36-37 Estimate 63,206 19,568 2,416,735 807,161 -1,441,336 4,748,006 699,785
FY37-38 Estimate 65,102 20,155 2,537,572 847,519 1,515,058 4,985,406 735,022
FY38-39 Estimate 67,055 20,760 2,664,450 889,895 --1,592,516 5,234,676 772,029
fY39-40 Estimate 69.067 21,382 2,797,673 934,390 1,673,898 5,496,410 810,894
FY4Cl-41 Estimate 71,139 22,024 2,937,556 981,109 --1.759.402 5,771,231 851,710
FY41-42 Estimate 73,273 22,685 3,084,434 l,030,165 -1,849,236 6,059,792 894,575
FY42-43 Estimate 75.471 23,365 3,238,656 1,081,673 --1,943,617 6,362,782 939,592
FY43-44 Estimate 77,735 24,066 3,400,589 1,135,757 -2,042,774 6,680,921 986,868
FY44-45 Estimate 80,067 24,788 3,570,618 1,192,544 -2,146,949 7,014,9 67 192,311
FY45-46 Estimate 82.469 25,532 3,749,149 1,252,172 ---2.256,393 7,365,715 -
FY46-47 Estimate 84,943 26,298 3,936,607 1,314,780 -2,371,373 7,734,001 -
FY47-48 Estimate 87,492 27,087 4,133,437 1,380,519 2,492,167 8,120,701 -
FY48-49 Estimate 90,116 27,899 4,340,109 1,449,545 -2,619,067 8,526,736
FY49-50 Estimate 92,820 28,736 I 4,557,114 1,522,022 -2,752,380 8,953,073 -
FY50-51 Estimate 95,605 29,5~8 4,784,970 1,598,124 2,892,430 9,400,727 ---~--r------FY51-52 Estimate 98.473 30.486 5,024,218 1,678,030 3,039,556 9,870,763
FY52-53 Estimate 101,427 31,401 5,275.429 1.761,931 3,194.113 10,364,301
fY53-54 Estimate 104,470 32,343 5,539,201 1,850,028 -3,356,475 10,882,516 -
FY54-55 Estimate 107,604 33,313 5,816,161 1,942,529 3,527,035 11,426,642
Notes:
(1} Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund
(2) Assumption is annual 5% increase for RPTTF and 3% increase for Fees.
(3) Total Distributed to Taxing Entities -Includes prior period adjustments and residual distributions.
(4) City Loan Repayment -FY14-15 & FYlS-16 are based on prior law. If Last and Final ROPS is approved, the payment formula cha nges in FY16-17
(S) Per the terms of the 1997 MOU, the County previously impounded tax increment to make bond payments. FY12-13 was the last year property tax was impounded. At June 30, 2015 the balance
of the Impound account(• prepaid item on the Successor Agency's gen.,ral ledger) was $638,144. Theoretically, the impcund account would be used to make bond payments until the $638,144 is
exhausted. I
6
40-Year lllustration of RPTTF -Scenario 2 I 1 Attachment C
I I I I I I I I I I I I
County Slol~ Controller County Fire DlslJtct County Bond County Def Ta• Impound Distributed T 0131 Distributed Total City Loan
Admln fees 121 ~tfeef21 hss-Thrv IS0.!1%1 Pan-Thnl {17"1 Repayments Iner Repay {61 Aa:ount{S) to RPV for ROPS lo Taxing Enlltles 131 Rl'TTF 111121 Repayment 141
FYU-13 Actual 28,394 -256,199 310,250 I 949,444 273,017 -1,507,054
FY13-14 Actual 31,816 -755,997 252,494 378,875 (83,015) 252,364 275,603 1,485,259
FY14-15 Actual 32,987 10,212 826,161 275,928 391,625 (391,625) 477,818 1,623,105 72,916
FY15-16 Estimate 33,976 10,519 867,469 289,724 408,250 {408,250) 502,573 1,704,260 47,885
FY16-17 estimate 34,996 10,834 910,842 304,210 418,750 339.735 (229,894) 1,789,473
FY17-18 Estimate 36,045 11,159 956,384 319,421 438,000 117,937 -1,878,947 -
FY18-19 Estimate 37,127 11,494 1,004,20~ 335,~ -_450,875 __!E.803 -1,972 ,~4--------38,241 ---,_ -FY19-20 Estimate 11,839 1,054,413 352,162 462,500 152,385 -2,071,539 .
FY20-21 Estimate 39,388 12,194 1,107,134 369.770 477,750 168,880 . . 2,175,116
FY21-22 Estimate 40,569 12,560 1,162,491 388,258 496,375 183,618 . . 2,283,872 .
FY22-23 Estimate 41,787 12,937 1,220,615 407,671 513,250 201,806 -. 2,398,066
FY23-24 Estimate 43,040 13,325 1,281,646 428,055 528,375 223,528 . 2,517,969
FY24-25 Estimate 44,331 13,725 1,345,728 449,457 541,750 248,875 2.643,867
FYZS-26 Estimate 45,661 14,136 1,413,015 471,930 563,125 268,193 -2,776,061
FY26-27 Estimate 47,031 14,560 1.483,666 495,527 577,375 296,705 -2,914,864
FY27-28 Estimate 48,442 14,997 1,557,849 520,303 594,500 324,516 3,060,607 -
FY28-29 Esti mate 49,895 15,447 1,635,741 546,318 966,235 --3,213,637
FY29-30 Estimate 51,392 15,911 1,717,528 573,634 1,015,854 -. 3,374,319
FY30-31 Estimate 52,934 16,388 1,803,405 602,316 1,067,992 . -3,543,035
FY31-32 Estimate 54,522 16,880 1,893,575 632,432 1,122,778 . . 3,720,187
FY32-33 Estimate 56,158 17,386 1,988,254 664,053 1,180,345 . . 3,906,196
FY33-34 Estimate 57,842 17,908 2,087,667 697,256 321,208 . . 919,626 4,101,506 555,682
f Y34-35 Estimate 59,578 18,445 2,192,050 732,119 --1,304,390 4,306,581 634,284
FY35-36 Estimate 61,365 18,998 2,301,652 768,725 . . 1,371,170 4.521,910 666,232 ---· -----~-----FY36--37 Estimate 63,206 19,568 2,416,735 807,161 . -1,441,336 4,748,006 699,785
FY37-38 Estimate 65,102 20,155 2,537.572 847,519 . . 1,515,058 4,985,406 735,022
FY38-39 Estimate 67,055 20,760 2,664,450 889,895 . . 1,592,516 5,234,676 772,029
FY39-40 Estimate 69,067 21,382 2.797.673 934,390 . -1,673,898 5,496,410 810.894
FY40-41 Estimate 71,139 22,024 2,937,556 981,109 . 1,759,402 5,771,231 851,710
FY41-42 Estimate 73,273 22,685 3,084,434 1,030,165 1,849,236 6,059,792 894,575
FY42-43 Estimate 75,471 23,365 3,238,656 1,081,673 . 1,943,617 6,362,782 939,592
FY43-44 Esti mate 77,735 24,066 3,400,589 1,135,757 2,042,774 6,680,921 986,868
FY44-45 Estimate 80,067 24,788 3,570,618 1,192,544 . . 2,146,949 7,014,967 1,036.517
FY45-46 Estimate 82,469 25,532 3,749,149 1,252,172 . . 2,256,393 7,365,715 1,088,657
FY46-47 Estimate 84,943 26,298 3,936,607 1.314,780 2,371,373 7,734,001 1,143,414
fY47-48 Estimate 87,492 27,087 4,133,437 1,380,519 . . 2,492,167 8,120,701 1,200,918
FY48-49 Estimate 90,116 27,899 4,340,109 1,449,545 . . 2,619,067 8,526,736 1,261,308
FY49-50 Estimate 92,820 28 ,736 4,557.114 1,522,022 . . . 2,752,380 8,953,073 1,324,728
FY50-51 Estimate 95,605 29,598 4,784,970 1,598,124 -2,892,430 9,400,727 1,391,329
fY51-52 Estimate 98,473 30,486 5,024,218 1,678,030 . . 3,039,556 9,870,763 536,835
FY52-53 Estimate 101,427 31,401 5.275,429 1,761,931 . 3,194,113 10,364,301
FY53-54 Estimate 104,470 32,343 5,539,201 1,850,028 -3,356,475 10,882,516 .
f Y54-55 Estimate 107,604 33,313 5,816,161 1.942,529 . 3,527,035 11,426,642
Notes:
[1) Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund
(2) Assumption is annual 5% increase for RPTIF and 3% increase for Fees .
(3} Total Distributed to Taxing Entities -Includes prior period adjustments and residual distributions.
(4) City Loan Repayment -FY14-15 & FYlS-16 are based on prior law. If Last and Final ROPS is approved, the payment formula changes in FY16-17 .
(5) Per the terms of the 1997 MOU, the County previously impounded tax increment to make bond payments. FY12-13 was the last year property tax was impounded. At June 30, 2015 the balance
o f !he Impound account (a prepaid item on the Successor Agency's general ledger} was 5638,144. Theoretically, the lmpcune account would be used to make bond payments until the $698,144 is
exhausted ,
(6) Assumption i s County consumes all available RPTTF to repay Counrv's Deferred Tax Increment, lciving oothi og for Clty Loan r e.pavment or distribution to ta>c lng entlt]es . I
7