RPVCCA_CC_SR_2011_09_06_I_City_Successor_Agency_RDACITY OF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
CAROL LYNCH,CITY ATTORNEY
SEPTEMBER 6,2011
ELECTION FOR THE CITY TO SERVE AS THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE RANCHO PALOS
VERDES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER~)Qx CL
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No.2011-_,a Resolution of
the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,making an election for the City to
serve as a successor agency under Part 1.85 in the event the Redevelopment Agency
is dissolved.
INTRODUCTION
This agenda item is to address a potential outcome of the California Supreme Court's
upcoming decision in the litigation challenging AS X1 26 and AS X1 27.It is possible
that the Court will strike down AS X1 27 but uphold AS X1 26.In such case,each
redevelopment agency will be dissolved even though the city adopted an ordinance to
participate in the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program established by Part 1.9
of AS X1 27.In addition,a successor agency will be designated for each dissolved
redevelopment agency and charged with administrating the wind-down of the dissolved
redevelopment agency.
The attached resolution designates the City to serve as the successor agency for the
Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency in the even the Agency is dissolved,as
described above.
BACKGROUND
AS X1 26,which was signed by the Governor of California on June,29,2011,added
Parts 1.8 and 1.85 to the Community Redevelopment Law.Part 1.8 immediately
R6876-0001\1389902vl.doc I-1
Election for the City to Serve as the Successor Agency to the Rancho Palos Verdes RDA
September 6,2011
Page 2 of3
suspends most redevelopment agency activities.Part 1.85 provides that on October 1,
2011,all existing redevelopment agencies and redevelopment agency components of
community development agencies are dissolved,and successor agencies are
designated as successor entities to the former redevelopment agencies.Except for
those provisions of the Redevelopment Law that are repealed,restricted,or revised
pursuant to AS X1 26,all authority,rights,powers,duties and obligations previously
vested with the former redevelopment agencies under the Redevelopment Law,are
vested in the successor agencies.AS X1 26 imposes numerous requirements on the
successor agencies,including continuing to make payments due for enforceable
obligations of the Agency,remit unencumbered balances of Agency funds to the County
Auditor-Controller for distribution to the taxing entities,and dispose of assets and
properties of the Agency as directed by the oversight board.
AS X1 27 was signed by the Governor concurrently with AS X1 26 and added Part 1.9
to the Community Redevelopment Law.Part 1.9 establishes an Alternative Voluntary
Redevelopment Program (AVRP)whereby a redevelopment agency will,
notwithstanding Parts 1.8 and 1.85,be authorized to continue to exist and carry out the
provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law.The City opted into the Alternative
Voluntary Redevelopment Program on August 16,2011,by adopting an ordinance by
which the City agreed to make specified annual payments to the County Auditor-
Controller for allocation to special districts and educational entities.
The California Redevelopment Association and League of California Cities have filed a
lawsuit in the Supreme Court of California alleging that AS X1 26 and AS X1 27 are
unconstitutional.On August 11,2011,the Supreme Court of California decided to hear
the case and set a briefing schedule designed to allow the Supreme Court to decide the
case before January 15,2012.On August 11,2011,the Supreme Court also issued a
stay order,which was subsequently modified on August 17,2011.Pursuant to the
modified stay order,the Supreme Court granted a stay of all of AS X1 27 (Le.,Part 1.9),
except for Health and Safety Code Section 34194(b )(2)(relating to the determination of
cities'fiscal year 2011-12 remittance amounts)and a partial stay of AS X1 26.With
respect to AS X1 26,Part 1.85 was stayed in its entirety,but Part 1.8 (including Health
and Safety Code Section 34173)was not stayed.
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution electing for the City to serve as a
successor agency in the event the Court lifts the stay and strikes down AS X1 27 while
upholding AS X1 26.
FISCAL IMPACT
In the event the Agency is dissolved and the City is the successor agency,the City will
be entitled to an annual administrative cost allowance of not less than $250,000 per
year,provided that the allowance will exclude any administrative costs that can be paid
from bond proceeds or sources other than property tax,and provided that the amount is
subject to reduction if there is a shortfall of funds available to make payments to taxing
entities and to pay debt service on enforceable obligations.
I-2
Election for the City to Serve as the Successor Agency to the Rancho Palos Verdes RDA
September 6,2011
Page 3 of3
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
There will be no new environmental impact associated with any of the decisions outlined
above.
Attachment:
Resolution No.2011-_
I-3
RESOLUTION NO.2011-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES MAKING AN ELECTION IN CONNECTION WITH SERVING AS A
SUCCESSOR AGENCY UNDER PART 1.85 OF DIVISION 24 OF THE
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE AND TAKING CERTAIN
ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.
RECITALS:
A.The Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency")is a
redevelopment agency in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (the "City"),created pursuant
to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000)of
Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code)(the "Redevelopment Law").
S.The City Council of the City (the "City Council")adopted Ordinance No.
190,approving and adopting the redevelopment plan for Project Area No.1,and from
time to time,the City C9uncil has amended such redevelopment plan.The Agency is
and has been undertaking a program to redevelop the Project Area.
C.AS X1 26 was signed by the Governor of California on June 29,2011,
making certain changes to the Redevelopment Law,including adding Part 1.8
(commencing with Section 34161)and Part 1.85 (commencing with Section 34170)to
Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code.Commencing upon the
effectiveness of AS X1 26,AS X1 26 suspends most redevelopment agency activities
and,among other things,prohibits redevelopment agencies from incurring indebtedness
or entering into or modifying contracts.Effective October 1,2011,AS X1 26 dissolves
all existing redevelopment agencies and redevelopment agency components of
community development agencies,provides for the designation of successor agencies
as successor entities to former redevelopment agencies,and provides that except for
those provisions of the Redevelopment Law that are repealed,restricted,or revised
pursuant to AS X1 26,all authority,rights,powers,duties and obligations previously
vested with the former redevelopment agencies under the Redevelopment Law,are
vested in the successor agencies.AS X1 26 imposes numerous requirements on the
successor agencies and subjects successor agency actions to the review of oversight
boards established pursuant to the provisions of Part 1.85.
D.Health and Safety Code Section 34173,which is set forth in Part 1.85,
provides that a city that authorized the creation of a redevelopment agency may elect to
serve,or not to serve,as the successor agency under Part 1.85.
E.AS X1 27 was signed by the Governor of California on June 29,2011,
adding Part 1.9 (commencing with Section 34192)to Division 24 of the California Health
and Safety Code.Part 1.9 establishes an Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment
81000-0163\1389895v1.doc I-4
Program whereby,notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1.8 and Part 1.85,a
redevelopment agency will be authorized to continue to exist and carry out the
provisions of the Redevelopment Law upon the enactment,prior to the applicable
deadline established in Part 1.9 (with the earliest deadline being October 1,2011),by
the city council of the city which includes that redevelopment agency of an ordinance to
comply with Part 1.9.Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34192,if a city
participates in the Alternative Voluntary Program and complies with all requirements
and obligations contained in Part 1.9,the redevelopment agency in that city will be
exempt from Part 1.8 and Part 1.85.
F.The California Redevelopment Association and League of California Cities
have filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of California alleging that AS X1 26 and AS
X1 27 are unconstitutional.On August 11,2011,the Supreme Court of California
decided to hear the case and set a briefing schedule designed to allow the Supreme
Court to decide the case before January 15,2012.On August 11,2011,the Supreme
Court also issued a stay order,which was subsequently modified on August 17,2011.
Pursuant to the modified stay order,the Supreme Court granted a stay of all of AS X1
27 (Le.,Part 1.9),except for Health and Safety Code Section 34194(b)(2)(relating to
the determination of cities'fiscal year 2011-12 remittance amounts)and a partial stay
of AS X1 26.With respect to AS X1 26,Part 1.85 was stayed in its entirety,but Part 1.8
(including Health and Safety Code Sections 34167 and 34169)was not stayed.
G.The City Council desires to now adopt this Resolution making an election
in connection with serving as a successor agency under Part 1.85 in the event that the
stay is lifted,AS X1 26 is upheld by the Supreme Court of California,and the Agency is
dissolved pursuant to Part 1.85.
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS,DETERMINES,
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part
of this Resolution.
Section 2.This Resolution is adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 34173.
Section 3.The City Council hereby elects for the City to serve as a successor
agency under Part 1.85 in the event the Agency is dissolved pursuant to Part 1.85.
Section 4.The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified
copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor-Controller.
Section 5.The officers and staff of the City are herby authorized and directed,
jointly and severally,to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or
Resolution No.2011-
Page 2 of2
81000-0163\1389895v1.doc I-5
advisable to effectuate this Resolution,and any such actions previously taken by such
officers are hereby ratified and confirmed .
.Section 6.The adoption of this Resolution is not intended and shall not
constitute a waiver by the City of any right the City may have to challenge the legality of
all or any portion of AS X1 26 or AS X1 27 through administrative or judicial
proceedings.
Section 7.At such time as the Agency becomes exempt from Parts 1.8 and
1.85,this Resolution shall be of no further force or effect.
Section 8.This Resolution has been reviewed with respect to applicability of
the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"),the State CEQA Guidelines
(California Code of Regulations,Title 14,Sections 15000 et seq.,hereafter the
"Guidelines"),and the City's environmental guidelines.The City Council has
determined that this Resolution is not a "project"for purposes of CEQA,as that term is
defined by Guidelines Section 15378,because this Resolution is an organizational or
administrative activity that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the
environment.(Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5)).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of September 2011.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I,Carla Morreale,City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,hereby
certify that the above Resolution No.2011-_was duly and regularly passed and
adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on September 6,
2011.
City Clerk
Resolution No.2011-
Page 3 of 3
81000-0163\1389895v1.doc I-6