HomeMy WebLinkAboutR06-Economic Development Agency
-~.._-
"
o
o
o
o
o
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
OF TIll CITY OF SAIl BIRlQRDIBO
RlOUIST FOR COIMISSION/COUlICIL ACTION
From:
KENNETH J. HENDERSON
Executive Director
Subject: IIIRGIR OF SAIl BIRlQRDIRO
RlDIVILOPIIDT PROJECT
ARIAS
Date:
April 10, 1992
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SvnoDsis of Previous C~fssionlCouncil/C~tttee Action(s):
On April 9, 1992, subsequent to extended discussion, the Redevelopment
Committee recommended the Community Development Commission approve
staff implementation of merging the City'S redevelopment project areas.
ReCnMMPnded IIotion(s):
(C----1.tv Develollment C---fssion)
MOTION:
That the Community Development Commission authorize the
merger of all or a portion of the City of San Bernardino
Redevelopment Project areas and direct staff to undertake
all necessary implementation actions and procedures to
consummate the proposed merger.
Administrator
Contact Person(s): K~nneth Henderson
Phone:
5081
Project Area(s): All
Ward(s):
1-7
Supporting Data Attached:
Staff ReDort: 4/8/92 RDA Committee Staff Reoort
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $ NIA
Source:
NIA
Budget Authority: N/A
CommissionlConn~tl Notes:
KJH:SWP:dle:5687R
COIMISSION IIIITIlIG AGlRDA
lleetiDa Date: 04/20/1992
6
Agenda Item lI1aber:
o
o
o
o
o
DBVBLOPMBBT DBPARTMBBT
OF 7'IIB CUY OF SO Jj.lOlWnnIlto
STAFF REPORT
IBV~ OF SO BBvwnnIBO RtrnBVELOPImRT PROJECT nlUll
Subsequent to Commission approval for staff to undertake necessary
actions to merge all redevelopment project areas, staff began work on
the task. A schedule for implementation has been developed and key
issues have been evaluated. It is now appropriate, as directed by the
Commission, for the staff conclusions to be reviewed and a policy
decision to be made regarding implementation. Attached is a
Redevelopment Committee staff report detailing a tentative action
schedule necessary to merge the projects (a best case scenario of
thirty four (34) weeks) and overall comments about the process in
general.
The State of California provides enabling legislation under
redevelopment law to merge redevelopment projects, a process which the
City of San Bernardino has initiated previously. While many of the
required steps are procedural and ministerial in nature, the following
text highlights some staff observations that may be pertinent to the
concerns of the Commission:
1.
Mergers result in a combined statement of debt and allow an
efficient and easier allocation of Agency resources from one
project area to another.
2. Given an extended expiration time for all project areas under a
single statement of debt, it will significantly increase bonding
capacity and tax increment cash flow to fund projects and provide
desirable flexibility to underwrite projects anywhere within the
merged plan.
3. The merger process is similar to forming a new project area and
requires fiscal review. During the fiscal review, all taxing
entities have an opportunity to reopen and negotiate the issue of
tax increment distribution and sharing ratios.
4. Previously approved "pass through agreements" are exempt and
continue to be honored upon the merger of all or a portion of
existing redevelopment project areas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJH:SWP:dle:5687R
COIK[SSIOB IIIlB'rIlIG AGDDA
Meeting Date: 04/20/1992
Agenda It_ Bullber: ~
o
o
o
o
o
DEVELOPIWft DEPAKnu1n" STAFF IIBPORr
MERGER 01' SAB R1n!1InntlO IIBDEVELOPIWft PROJBCT AIIBAS
April 10, 1992
Page x-ber -2-
5. If existing project areas are merged, each of the Agency's project
areas are still subject to the minimum twenty percent (20%)
housing set aside of the total tax increments.
6. Certified notices of the proposed merger must be mailed to
property owners within the affected project area boundaries.
7. Where a project area's debt limitation ceiling or cap has been
reached, the merged project areas allows the new debt ceiling to
be for the merged projects as a whole.
While there may no doubt be other examples where merged projects make
sense, it is abundantly clear that such a restructuring is in the best
operational, financial and administrative interest of the Redevelopment
Agency.
On April 13, 1992, at its regular meeting, the Northwest Project Area
Committee, pursuant to a staff presentation and request, endorsed the
proposed merger.
It is appropriate that the Commission discuss the issue of merging
redevelopment projects to the degree it deems sufficient and authorize
staff to begin immediate implementation of the process to accomplish
the merger of all or a portion of the City's existing redevelopment
project areas.
Staff recommends adoption of the form motion.
1UUII.U5iID J.
Deve1ox-ent Depar
B, Bzeeutive Director
ent
KJH:SWP:dle:5687R
COMIIISSIOB IIIBTII!lG AGEBDA
Meeting Date: 04/20/1992
Agenda It_ __ber: ~
o
8
o
o
o
DIVBLOPIIIlIr DBPh:ou1u;
SUI'!' IBPORr
Nlbr...:ar OP !IIA. Ru..avnIBD DIJ.KVKI.nPlllft PROJECT A.....
Health anclSafety Code Section 33485, n .Hll., of the COllllllUJ1ity
Redevelopment Law provides for the lIIerler of separate ezistina
redevelopment project areas. Several additional sections of the
California Community Redevelopment Law, commencina with Section 33470,
are unique to specific redevelopment alencies and have lelislatively
provided for either the direct lIIerler of redevelopment project areas by
lelislative act or have authorized a lIIerler subject to sOllie additional
action of a particular city council and redevelopment alency. The city
of San Bernardino has historically been very active in prOlllotina the
lelislative lIIefler concept datina baCk to the late 1970's and throuah the
early 1980's.
The California Lelislature in 1980 adopted provisions that would apply to
all redevelopment alencie. se&kina to lIIerle any two or more redevelopment
project are.. by requirina such alencies to adhere to the procedures
applicable to the amendment of a redevelopment project area pursuant to
Health and Safety Code Section 33450, n .Hll.
The San Bernardino Redevelopment Aaency (the "Aaency") is contemplatina
the lIIerler of all ezistina redevelopment project areas includina the
lIIerler of the previously lIIerled Central City Projects with the other
redeveloplllent project areas not previously lIIerled.
Existina Redevelopllent Law include. limitations on the ability of a
redevelopment aeeney to expend 1II0neys frolll one redevelopment project area
within the boundaries of another redevelopment project area. Different
tests apply whether the intended use is for a public illlprovement project,
a traditional redevelopment project, payment of administrative expenses
or for the provision of low- and 1II0derate-incollle housina. Lelally
permissible but cumbersollle vehicles have been employed by redeveloplllent
alencies which vehicles have the effect of tranaferrina surplus tax
increment revenues frolll one redevelopment project area to another while
also ensurina that such tranafer be considered as an indebtedness for
purposes of such redevelopment &leney's Statement of Indebtedness in
accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33675.
------------------------------þ
ICJH:dle:56861
IIIDBVILOPIIIft COIIU'rDI
Keetina Date: 04/08/1992
h
Aaenda It.. .0:
o
o
o
ft 0
DBVBLOPMBII! DBPAm-..:'DP UPOIIT
MERGD or s.o BRIIIIAlmtBO IlIDBVBLOPMBII! PROJECT .uu.
April a, 1992
Paae ~r -2-
A mercer of redevelopment project area. under the authorization of Health
" and Safet1 Code Section 33485, n .I.IA., which require. adherence to the
procedure. undertaken for an amendaent of a redevelopment plan pursuant
to Health and Safet1 Code Section 33450, n .I.IA., would require as a
minimum the following actions:
1. Notification of all affected taxing acencies who would then have the
abilit1 to establi.h a fiscal review committee which adheres to the
timing requirements for the fiscal review process pursuant to Health
and SafetJ Code Section 33353 n .I.IA.
2. Notification b1 certified mail to all propert1 owners within the
affected redevelopment project area boundaries recarding the holding
of a public hearing on such proposed mercer amendment.
3. Publication of a notice of public hearing recarding the proposed
amendaent and the conducting of a public hearing on such proposed
mercer amendment.
4. The drafting and distribution of the proposed amending lancuace
relating to each redevelopment plan.
A mercer of ~ number of redevelopment project areas would not in ~
wa1 nullifJ or 8Ilend ~ existing tax increment pass-throuch acreementa
between the San Bernardino Redevelopment Alenc1 and the affected taxing
acencie.. Taxing aaencie. that present11 have a pa..-throuch acreement
with the Alene, pertaining to a redevelopment project area,that is to be
merced with another redevelopment project area which newer redevelopment
project area doe. not have a similar pass-throuch acreement would
continue to have the oricinal pass-throuch acreement remain in effect
solel1 with recard to the oricinsl redevelopment project srea as was the
situation prior to the mercer.
It is well known that other redevelopment aaencies which have attempted
to merge redevelopment project areas, even without an extension of the
life of a redevelopment project area and without increasing bonded
indebtedness limitations or tax increment revenue allocation limitstions,
have nevertheless been forced to deal with affected taxing agencies
throuch the fiscal review process with respect to the proposed merced
redevelopment project areas for which no pass-throuch agreements existed.
ICJH:dle:5686R
UWliVJU.llPMBll! COMIITTBB
Meetine Date: 04/08/1992
b
Aaenda It_ lieu
o
"
e
o
DEYBLOPIIDf DBP~tiJ'I' upon 0
ImRGER OP SAlI BD1Illtnn'o UDIVILOPIIDf PROJECT ADA
April a. 1992
Pqe "ber -3-
----------------------------------------------------------
The Alency 18 currently facina a d11_ that 18 characterized by the
situation where the Ireatest tax increment revenue producina potential is
located in redevelopment project areas that do not at thia time have the
Ireateat need for redevelopment assistance. Conversely, the areas with
the Ireateat current financial need are the Downtown Area and the more
recently adopted redevelopment project areaa located on the San
Bernardino West Side. Althouah creative ways are available to accomplish
what is in effect a tranafer of funds from one redevelopment project area
to another to accompliah specific redevelopment activitiea, any proposal
which involves the incurrina of indebtedneas with either conventional
lenders or with bondholders requires a more direct approach for the
transfer of such funds. Specifically. under such circlllUlteces the best
procedure is that which can be brouaht about throuah the redevelopment
project merler action.
Such conventional lenders or bondholders would not be willina to assume
the r18lt that a redevelopment saency would in all cases be able to malte
the necessary findinas and to enter into the necessary tranaactions to
allow tranafers of tax increment to occur. Instead such lenders or
bondholders would want assurance that all steps have been accompliShed,
such as throuah the merler process, in order that no furthar actions
would need to be taken nor could any third party object to such transfer
of funds that may be pledled to any such third party lender or bondholder.
............:rn .A.CllOll SI;IIK..n... ftm PRO~""'" .
VRI..&""';: m .l ~ 01" DTftIBI: IUliJlAYKLOPIIIII!' PmDCr ...A.
Week 1
Aleney adopts Resolution authorizina initiation of actions by Agency
Staff in connection with proposed merler of existina redevelopment
project areas. Staff causes preparation of Amendments to aistina
redevelopment plans which describe the proposed merler.
Week 3
Agency adopts Resolution requestina Plannina Commission to review
proposed Amendmente re merler of existina redevelopment plans with
the City General Plan.
Week 3
Alency Staff mails notice of intent to Merle Project Areas Throuah
Amendment of Existina Redevelopment Plans via certified mail to
taxina saencies.
KJB:dle:5686R
UDIVILOPIIDf COIBln:.u
MeetinaDate: 04/08/1992
t,
.
Aaenda It. .0:
o
"
o
o
DEVELOPlID'! DBP~rAn' IBlOar
MERGER 01' SAIl IlDlWtDIlIO IBDEVELOPIID'! PROJIC'f AlBA
April 8. 1992
Pale Rmaber -4-
Week 3
Week 4
Week 4
Week 6
throuah
Week 20
Week 7
Alency Staff sen4a to any and all Responsible Alencies and every
affected taxina entity a Rotice of Intent to prepare Environmental
Impact Report, if determined necessary 1 (responses if any, are
due from Responsible Alencies within forty-five (45) days).
Alency adopts Resolution authorizina the Staff to initiate contact
with the County Fiscal Review Committee and any fiscal review
committees previously formed in connection with any ezistina
redevelopment project areas.
Alency adopts Resolution makina certain recommendations relardina
consultations with ezistina Project Area Committees, if any.
If Fiscal Review Committee is requested - within fifteen (15) days
of receipt of notice that a Fiscal Review Committee is created,
Alency shall initiate consultations with Fiscal Review Committee
and, thereafter, transmits copies of proposed Amendments to Fiscal
Review Committee (33353.4).
Preliminary meetina of Alency Stsff with County officials and Fiscal
Review Committees re fiscal impacts of proposed Amendments to
Redevelopment Plans - Distribution of proposed Amendments.
Rote: It3J:y affected taxina alencies may ssk for formation of a
Fiscal Review Committee.
Fiscal Review Committee holds hesrina on proposed Amendments to
Merle not less than twenty-five (25), and not more than forty (40),
days after receipt of proposed Amendments (33353.4).
Bearinas must be completed within fifteen (15) days of commencement
of the above-referenced hearinas.
1 An environmental review will be required. However, after completion
of the Initial Study it may be determined that a Relative Declaration may
suffice.
KJH:d1e:5686R
IBDBVILOPIID'! CDMIrrBB
lleetina Date: 04/08/1992
Alenda It. Ro:
h
o
o
o
DEVELOPMDr DIP~UI'P IIPORr 0
MERGER OF SAIl R1!1I.,.nlBO RlDBYBLOPMDr PROJECT AUA
April 8. 1992
Page 1Iuaber -5-
---------------------------------
Within thirty (30) days of conclusion of the above referenced
hearings. Filcal Review Co_ittee shall send report to Aaency
(33353.5) and Director of Housing and C~ity Development
(33353.6) analyzing the proposed Amendments to Kerae.
Aaeney must respond in writing to report within thirty (30) days of
receipt and in no eTent later than one (1) weelt prior to the public
hearing (33353.7).
Week 10 Submission of Draft Environmental Impact Report to Secretsry of
Resources and Publication of Notice of Completion of the Draft
Environmental Impsct Report.
Week 18 Aaency sends Notice of Intent to Merae Project Areas to the
Department of Housing and Community Development (S33488).
Week 20 Aaency requests City Council to conduct a joint public hearing
reaarding the proposed Amendments to Merae Project Areas. authorizes
publication of notice of joint pUblic hearing on Week 25.
Week 20 City Council consents to a joint public hearing reaarding the
proposed Amendments to Merae Project Areas. authorizes publication
of notice of joint public hearing for Week 25.
Week 20 Planning Commission adopts resolution re conforaity of proposed
Amendments to Merae Project Areas with the General Plan.
Week 21 Mail letter to Property OWners and notice concerning joint public
hearing.
Week 22 First publication of notice of joint public hearing.
Week 22 Last day for public comments to Environmental Impact Report.
Week 22 Preparation of Public Hearing binders and delivery to members:
1. Proposed Amendments to existing Redevelopment Plans.
2. Aaency Report to Council re Proposed Amendments to existing
Redevelopment Plans.
---- ------
IC.JH:dle:5686R
lUWliy...oPMDr co..u=_
Keetina Date: 04/08/1992
h
Aallllda It. .0:
o
o
o
DIVILOPMBft DBP~S1'AIT RBPOIIr 0
MEIGD or SAIl R'R1IIIAlI1lIIO IBDIVILOPMBft PROJECT AlIA
April 8. 1992
Paae __ber -6-
-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Week 23 Second publication of notice of joint public headq.
Week 23 Third and final publication of notice of joint pUblic heariq.
-'
Week 25 City Council and Alency relular meetiqs; joint pUblic heariq on
proposed Amendments to existiq Redevelopment Plans; City Council
Section 33451 public heariq; Alency and City Council adopt
followiq:
Documents:
1. Aaency Resolution certifyiq the Environmental Impact Report
and approviq the Amendments to Merle Project Areas.
2. City Council Resolution certifyiq the Environmental Impact
Report for the Amendments to Merle Project Areas.
3. Ordinance approviq the AmendllentB to Merle Redevelopment Plans
introduced and liven first readiq by the City Council (If any
comments were subaitted at the public heariq. the comments
will be responded to at a second meetiq at least one week
after the public heariq).
Week 26 Second readiq of Ordinance by City Council
Week 26 A. Recordation of documents with County Recorder's.Office which
include:
1. Ordinance
2. Statement that Merler of Project Areas has been completed
B. City Clerk transmits a copy of Ordinance to Aaency and causes
the publication of Ordinance
1. Transmittal letter
2. Published ordinance
--------------------------
ICJB:dle:5686R
bJq;Y.lIa.OPMBft COIKlnu
Meetina Date: 04/08/1992
b
Aaenda It_ lieu
o
o
o
/~/
o
DBVBLOPMIIl1' DlPD.......... S'UFP UPORr
MBJtGD OF lWIlJmnI&lmDl) IBDllvlILOPMIIl1' PROJJ:C'r ADA
April a, 1992
Paae lf1aber -7-
o
C. City Clerk transmits certified mail, return receipt requested,
c~pies of Ordinance and Amendments to existing Project Areas to:
1. All taxing acencles
2. County Tax Assessor
3. County Audi tor
4. State Board of Equalization:
a. Cover letter
b. Recorded document
c. Redevelopment project area map
d. Ordinance adopting Amendments
Week 30 Effective date of Ordinance.
Week 30 Last day to challenge adequacy of Environmental Impact Report.
Week 34 Last day to challenge the mercer.
Staff recommends adoption of the form motion.
............. J. ""."KII!lI)., B:l:ecutive Director
Develo~t Departaent
---------------------------------------------
KJH:dle:5686R
IBDllvlILOPMIIl1' COIlMITDB
MeetiDa Date: 04/08/1992
h
Aaenda lUll 110: