HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-37 - Electing to Serve as a Successor AgencyRESOLUTION NO. 11- 37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF COSTA MESA ELECTING TO SERVE AS A
SUCCESSOR AGENCY UNDER PART 1.85 OF
DIVISION 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND
SAFETY CODE IN THE EVENT THE AGENCY IS
REQUIRED TO BE DISSOLVED; AND TAKING CERTAIN
ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.
WHEREAS, the Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency, City of Costa Mesa,
California ("Agency") is organized and existing pursuant to the California Community
Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code § 33000, et seq. ("CRL") and is
responsible for the administration of redevelopment activities within the City of Costa -
Mesa; and
WHEREAS, the City adopted the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan")
for the Costa Mesa Downtown Project ("Project Area") that was originally adopted by
the City Council by Ordinance No. 73-74 on December 24, 1973, and thereafter
amended by Ordinance No. 77-27 on July 5, 1977, Ordinance No. 80-22 on November
18, 1980, Ordinance No. 86-24 on December 15, 1986, Ordinance No. 94 15 on
November 7, 1994, Ordinance Nos. 03-12 and 03-13 on November 17, 2003, and
Ordinance No. 07-13 on June 19, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the City and Agency are responsible for implementation of the
Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area, and the Redevelopment Plan sets forth a
plan for redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the policies and standards of
the General Plan of the City; and
WHEREAS, since adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency has
undertaken redevelopment projects in the Project Area to eliminate blight, to improve
public facilities and infrastructure, to renovate and construct affordable housing, and to
enter into partnerships with private industries to create jobs and expand the local
economy; and
1
WHEREAS, continued redevelopment of the Project Area to eliminate blight,
improve public. facilities and infrastructure, provide affordable housing, and enter into
public and private partnerships to improve the community, create jobs, and expand the
local economy is vital to the health, safety and welfare of the City; and
WHEREAS, Parts 1.8, 1.85 and 1.9 of Division 24 of the CRL were added by
Assembly ' Bill X1 26 and Assembly Bill X1 27 (together, "2011 Redevelopment
Legislation"), which laws purport to become effective immediately; and
WHEREAS, the 2011 Redevelopment Legislation is a part of multiple trailer bills
to the FY 2011-2012 California budget bills that were approved by both Houses of the
State Legislature on June 15, 2011, signed by the Governor on June 28, 2011, and
chaptered on June 29, 2011; and
WHEREAS, Part 1.8 of the CRL added by the Redevelopment Legislation ("Part
1.8") provides for the restriction of activities and authority of the Agency in the interim
period prior to dissolution to certain "enforceable obligations" and to actions required for
the general winding up of affairs, preservation of assets, and certain other goals
delineated in Part 1.8; and
WHEREAS, Part 1.85 of the CRL added by the 2011 Redevelopment Legislation
("Part 1.85") provides for the statewide dissolution of all redevelopment agencies,
including the Agency, as of October 1, 2011, and provides that, thereafter, a successor
agency will administer the enforceable obligations of the Agency and otherwise wind up
the Agency's affairs, all subject to the review and approval of an oversight committee;
and
WHEREAS, Part 1.9 of the CRL ("Part 1.9") provides that a redevelopment
agency may continue in operation if a city or county that includes a redevelopment
agency adopts an ordinance agreeing to comply with and participate in the Voluntary
Alternative Redevelopment Program established in Part 1.9 ("Program"); and
WHEREAS, the City is aware that the validity, passage, and applicability of the
2011 Redevelopment Legislation is the subject of judicial challenge(s), including the
1
1
action: California Redevelopment Association, et al v. Ana Matosantos, et al ("CRA
Action"); and
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court accepted original jurisdiction of the CRA Action
on August 11, 2011, notified the parties of the briefing schedule, and, importantly,
issued a stay order affecting Part 1.85 and Part 1.9, but the court did not stay Sections
34161 to 34167 of Part 1.8, then on August 17, 2011, the Supreme Court modified its
stay order, which released the stay on Sections 34167.5 to 34169.5 of Part 1.8 and on
Section 34194(b)(2) of Part 1.9, making those laws now effective ("Supreme Court
Stay"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Part 1.85 Sections 34171 (j) and 34173(a) provide that a
successor agency is designated as successor entity to the former redevelopment
agency and the host city that created the agency may elect to serve, or not to serve, as
the successor agency under Part 1.85, albeit subject to the Supreme Court Stay; and
WHEREAS, as of the date of adoption of this Resolution, the City Council has
not completed the process and/or the time for the "opt -in" ordinance to become effective
has not elapsed due to the Supreme Court Stay in for order the Agency to participate in
the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program, therefore, the City Council desires
to adopt this Resolution making an election in connection with the City to serve as the
successor agency under Part 1.85 in the event 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. Subject to the Supreme Court Stay, this Resolution is adopted
pursuant to Part 1.85, Sections 34171 and 34173.
Section 3. The City Council hereby elects to serve as a successor agency
under Part 1.85 in the event the Agency is required to be 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 Chief Executive Officer (and designees, as officers and staff of
the City) is hereby authorized and directed to do any and all things which they may
deem necessary or advisable to effectuate this Resolution and any such actions
previously taken by the CEO (and designees) are hereby ratified and confirmed.
Section 6. Subject to the Supreme Court Stay and at such time as the City
and Agency become exempt from Parts 1.8 and 1.85 based on the effectiveness of its
actions to "opt -in" pursuant to Part 1.9, this Resolution shall be of no further force or
effect.
Section 7. This Resolution shall in no way be construed as requiring the City
(or Agency) to abide by the 2011 Redevelopment Legislation in the event either, or
both, bills are found unconstitutional or otherwise legally invalid in whole or in part, nor
shall this Resolution effect or give rise to any waiver of rights or remedies the City
(and/or. Agency) may have, whether in law or in equity, to challenge 2011
Redevelopment Legislation. This Resolution shall not be construed as the City's
(and/or Agency's) willing acceptance of, or concurrence with the 2011 Redevelopment
Legislation, either AB X1 26 or AB X1 27; nor does this Resolution evidence any
assertion or belief whatsoever on the part of the City (and/or Agency) the 2011
Redevelopment Legislation is/are constitutional or lawful.
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
1
1
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)).
Section 9. This Resolution shall take effect upon the date of its adoption.
Section 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of September 2011.
ATTEST:
Julie olcik, City Clerk
Gary Mona an, Ma or
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
iomACity Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, JULIE FOLCIK, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY
that foregoing Resolution No. 11-37 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of September, 2011,
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MONAHAN, RIGHEIMER, LEECE.
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE.
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BEVER, MENSINGER.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the
City of Costa Mesa this 7th day of September, 2011.
(SEAL)
1
Qkz-er� 79z:i�'�2
JUL FOLCIK, CiTY CLERK