Lawmakers attempt to revive redevelopment

August 31, 2012

Funding for redevelopment in California could be revived through four bills slated to divert property taxes for local development projects.

These bills have made it to the final sprint of the state legislative session, which ends today at midnight, and are now on the governor’s desk. [CaliforniaWatch]

In December, the Supreme Court upheld legislation that ended redevelopment agency programs. Instead, funds that had been earmarked for local redevelopment agencies are being used to help balance the state’s budget.

The four bills would allow cities and counties to divert property tax revenues from local agencies if an area is designated for redevelopment. However, unlike the previous redevelopment agency program, none of the property tax diversions could come from taxes that fund schools.

SB 1156, by Senate Pro Tem Darrel Steinberg, D-Sacramento, would create new entities called Sustainable Communities Investment Authorities that would allow counties and other agencies to withhold their property tax contributions if they don’t support the development project.

The three other bills modify infrastructure financing districts, which, like the former redevelopment agencies, use property tax revenue increases to fund projects. The bills would reduce the voter approval requirements for establishing a project area and issuing new bonds. Existing law requires cities and counties to get two-thirds of voters to approve a new project area before they can divert property taxes to fund it and take on debt, California Watch said.

SB 214, by state Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, would remove the voter approval requirement currently needed to create an infrastructure financing district and to issue bonds.

AB 2551, by Assemblyman Ben Hueso, D-San Diego, would remove voter approval requirements for certain renewable energy projects.

AB 2144, by Assembly Speaker John Pérez, D-Los Angeles, would not eliminate the voter approval requirement entirely, but would reduce it from two-thirds to 55 percent,California Watch said.

 


Loading...

24 Comments

  1. Paso_citizen says:

    Another example of a government gone amok. Voters, get it together and understand what Sacramento is doing with your hard-earned tax money. If our elected officails are not doing what we elcted them do, then
    THROW them out.

    Note to Paso Robles voters : A VOTE FOR STRONG IS A VOTE FOR WRONG. Fred Strong has proven over and over he is not looking out for the best interests of the citixzens of this city. Really take a hard, detailed look and you will see the facts – not what he tells you. Vote him out.

    (4) 4 Total Votes - 4 up - 0 down
  2. Citizen says:

    For anyone interested in why the California Assembly is more interested in promoting gay rights, Latino rights, unions, redevelopment and other government programs, rather than working on the California economy, and doesn’t mind bending the truth, look no further than the speaker of the assembly, John Perez.

    “Pérez grew up in El Sereno and Highland Park before attending the University of California, Berkeley. He did not graduate from Berkeley but instead dropped out after his junior year. Various biographies of Pérez dating back to the 1990s had falsely stated that he was a Berkeley graduate, an assertion included in several press releases issued by mayors of Los Angeles and in 2004 remarks inserted by then-Congresswoman Hilda Solis into the Congressional Record. When the San Francisco Chronicle wrote about these inconsistencies in May 2011, Pérez’s office clarified that he was not, in fact, a Berkeley graduate.[1]

    Pérez is the cousin of Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and has spent seven years handling political matters for the United Food and Commercial Workers, a union representing supermarket workers,[2] and also has served as political director of the California Labor Federation.[3] He was a member of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency until 2008, when he resigned from the board in order to run for the Assembly.

    Pérez is openly gay[12] – he is the first openly LGBT Speaker of the California State Assembly[10] and, after Minnesota’s Allan Spear, only the second LGBT person to be elected to lead a state legislative chamber”.

    –from Wikipedia.

    Although Californians know little about John Perez, the foreign press reports what is actually happening in Sacramento without sanitizing the comments .http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2195109/California-bans-gay-cure-therapy-lawmakers-say-want-protect-sissy-boys.html?ito=feeds-newsxml “‘One of our number one priorities in this house is to protect the next generation of Californians,’ Mr Lara said in a speech ahead of the vote.

    ‘And some of those are sissy boys. And some of those sissy boys grow up to be Assembly members. And some of those sissy boys need help. And we are here to stand with those sissy boys.’

    Assembly member John Perez, the first openly gay speaker of California’s lower house, said during the debate: ‘It is inappropriate for anyone, including parents, to subject anybody to dehumanising activity’.”

    Where else -but in California -would it be deemed appropriate to make a “sissy boy speech” to the legislature. Our gay legislators are “giddy with power” under John Perez. Meanwhile, even Jerry Brown cannot get this legislature to take their economic responsibilities for the state seriously.

    (8) 12 Total Votes - 10 up - 2 down
    • kettle says:

      So Citizen, you support conversion therapy and who is (“the foreign press reports what is actually happening in Sacramento without sanitizing the comments”) sanitizing the comments? Where?

      The irony of someone with a agenda, calling out someone else with a agenda. Xenophobia much?

      (-5) 11 Total Votes - 3 up - 8 down
      • Citizen says:

        Kettle.

        No, I don’t support conversion therapy. I was using that as an example since it was mentioned recently in the Press. In fact, I should clarify that I was using that legislation as an example. There are other examples, I’m sure, of pro-union, pro-Latino, and of course, this story talks about pro-redevelopment legislation.

        I doubt if most people know that Perez is Villaraigosa’s cousin (Mayor of LA) and that he is deeply rooted in union activities, and that the rest of the world knows him as the first outwardly gay Assembly Speaker.

        (8) 12 Total Votes - 10 up - 2 down
        • NorthCountyDude says:

          I do believe in conversion therapy. God created men and female to be together and same sex attraction is caused by behavior that causes a chemical reaction much like people’s problem with porn. There is no scientific prove people are born with those attractions, but there is evidence supporting sexual abuse by the same gender can lead to same sex attraction and this proving it can be against someone’s will. Read the info about the boy who was straight and had six with his girlfriend until the sick-headed gay football coach raped the kid. Also, bisexual attraction approves you can not have a gay gene or straight gene. People that chose to be bi are getting boners off girls and guys.

          And hence more, CA voters voted against gay marriage.

          (-2) 6 Total Votes - 2 up - 4 down
          • NorthCountyDude says:

            And if you are against conversion therapy you must be gay in some form, or extremely liberal and a hippy.

            (1) 5 Total Votes - 3 up - 2 down
            • zaphod says:

              did you grow that idea all by yourself, in the garden of your mind?

              (-1) 1 Total Votes - 0 up - 1 down
            • MaryMalone says:

              Illogical. If a person doesn’t support “conversion therapy,” if anything, it indicates they are so firmly oriented in their own gender preference for sexual relations that they know they, themselves, could not switch to “the other side.”

              I think those who believe in “conversion therapy” can only do so because they are unsure of their own sexual orientation and, therefore, believe others can change sexual preference simply by “therapy.”

              (-1) 1 Total Votes - 0 up - 1 down
          • MaryMalone says:

            “Conversion therapy” is just a scam, based on a faulty premise: A person can change their sexual orientation.

            I am a heterosexual. I have no issues whatsoever with those who prefer same-gender partners, but that is simply not how I am wired. I am not attracted to women in the least little bit.

            That is why I know “Conversion therapy” is a scam: because my sexual orientation is unquestioningly heterosexual.

            So it makes me wonder…why do those who believe “conversion therapy” works believe that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation? Is their own sexual orientation so wishy-washy that THEY could change from hetero to homosexual?

            I believe those obsessed with other people’s sexual practices are pervs, and have bigger personal issues to face, and should not waste time trying to fine-tune other people’s sexual orientation.

            (-1) 1 Total Votes - 0 up - 1 down
            • NorthCountyDude says:

              I tend to disagree with alot of people and I can see I more so disagree with you Ms. Malone.

              God created me, so he knows what I was created for.

              For starters, my sexual orientation is I’m a Christian. Has been, and always will be.

              You ask why you are not attracted to females? Well, it’s because you don’t have that behavior or the cause of that behavior. You were not sexually abused, you did not have a bad relationship with the same sex parent, and it also appears you didn’t have problems with friends of the same gender growing up.

              People who have the same sex attraction are having a behavior that is fixing the emotion of a parent’s love or whatever the issue is.

              There are common things with people who struggle with same sex attractions.

              People I have talked to share similar traits and when they overcome the inner problem, then they start going back to the opposite attraction.

              (1) 1 Total Votes - 1 up - 0 down
              • cch says:

                Funny, I thought this story was about redevelopment agencies. Oh well, what do I know…

                (0) 0 Total Votes - 0 up - 0 down
  3. shelworth says:

    When they came for the trans-fat, I said nothing, when they came for the 20 oz and larger cokes, I said nothing, when they came to tax my neighbor’s new room addition, I said nothing………

    (12) 14 Total Votes - 13 up - 1 down
  4. kayaknut says:

    Is it any wonder that these bills to take away the voice of the people are all sponsored by Democrats. Democrats….the party of thepeople, yeah right.

    (13) 19 Total Votes - 16 up - 3 down
  5. Smacks Forehead says:

    What is interesting to me is how democrats argued against redevelopment agencies when they were becoming popular, describing them as agents of gentrification. But now that agency jobs are now lost they are fighting to reinstate. Shows you where their priorities are.

    (12) 16 Total Votes - 14 up - 2 down
    • MaryMalone says:

      I can’t speak for Democrats, but this liberal is, and has always been, concerned with supporting a strong economic growth in California and the U.S.

      Losing jobs is not a positive step towards having strong economic growth in America.

      On the other hand, I don’t like my tax money being wasted on redevelopment boondoggles like was seen in the City of Bell and many other cities.

      So I would prefer making redevelopment projects more strictly defined, fines for using the funds in other projects or for other issues to be increased, and the redevelopment funding to continue.

      (-1) 1 Total Votes - 0 up - 1 down
  6. The Gimlet Eye says:

    Pickin’ over the bones.

    (3) 7 Total Votes - 5 up - 2 down
  7. Booty JuJu says:

    Dear citizens not working in government / unions / big corporations: The world is run by a relatively small club – AND YOU ARE NOT A MEMBER.

    The rot runs deep.

    (18) 22 Total Votes - 20 up - 2 down
  8. SLOBIRD says:

    You are the winner!!!

    (1) 3 Total Votes - 2 up - 1 down
  9. Smacks Forehead says:

    What I take from this article: Democrats want to spend our money without our approval.

    (22) 26 Total Votes - 24 up - 2 down
    • photocal says:

      It takes more than just Democrats vote to help spend Our money. Homeowners spending more than $10,000. remodeling their homes in S.L.O. county areas, after Jan 1st will get a County inspection for green compliance. It’s free for now…. but then ????

      Hey…. it will be a whole new County agency. More IN jobs for the chosen few.

      (15) 17 Total Votes - 16 up - 1 down
      • SLOBIRD says:

        This think you are mistaken about the County inspection being free. When you model for $10,000 or more you will now pay $400 for the inspection and a list of recommendation will be made. At this point you won’t have to do anything but rest assured, that will be step 2… (except Debbie is coming on board and will stop it for now). Now they will start working on all the cities to do the same thing,

        (5) 7 Total Votes - 6 up - 1 down
        • photocal says:

          Sorry, but My information was there would no charge for the initial inspection (free) but …a permit fee to comply with recondemations ? Course… reading the Tribune, that magically arrived in My driveway this morning ( it was a political newsletter for Democrats) had the same story. Good luck to Debbie who may come on board ? Chances are slim to none that will happen. Time to move to Fresno.

          (-2) 4 Total Votes - 1 up - 3 down
          • Citizen says:

            Your information is wrong. “The audit–which will show homeowners ways to save energy–costs about $400….” Tribune

            (1) 5 Total Votes - 3 up - 2 down
            • photocal says:

              Yes Your right….. Thats the way it was written up in the Trib. But according to a Friend in Engineering… the first visit will be free but the energy -cost guide will cost $400. Do You really want some unkown person visiting… and checking Your home out. Dont worry big brother will protect You. SLO County SLO=Simply Lacking Organization.

              (4) 6 Total Votes - 5 up - 1 down

Comments are closed.