High court allows state to dissolve redevelopment agencies, sieze $1.7 billion


The California Supreme Court today upheld a law that dissolves the state's 400 redevelopment agencies and allows the state to seize $1.7 billion in property tax revenue to fund schools and special districts.

But the court struck down a second law that would have enabled the agencies to come back into existence if they agreed to contribute $400

million annually in future years to schools, transit and firefighting programs.

The panel said the second measure violated a 2010 voter initiative that barred the state from diverting property tax revenues from redevelopment agencies.

Justice Kathryn Werdegar wrote that the Legislature had the power to terminate the agencies, but did not have the authority to require mandatory payments as a condition of future existence.

Both laws were enacted by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in June as steps to help close the state's $25 billion budget deficit.

The state high court issued its ruling in San Francisco in a lawsuit filed by the California Redevelopment Association, League of California Cities and the cities of San Jose and Union City.


Like this comment
Posted by Rick Pshaw
a resident of Danville
on Jan 2, 2012 at 4:19 pm

There will be wailing and the gnashing of teeth over this and yet...

Most people still vote for democrats who will steal your money whenever they can. Remember that socialists will be successful as long as they don't run out of other people's money. Regrettably, the day when they do run out is terrifyingly close.

Like this comment
Posted by Tami
a resident of Alamo
on Jan 3, 2012 at 9:24 am

I second that. Unbelievable.

Like this comment
Posted by collins
a resident of Vista Grande Elementary School
on Jan 4, 2012 at 9:35 am

I disagree with the other two posts. First, to what "socialists" do you refer? Second, what has happened in the past with re-development agencies is sometimes appalling. There are many cases where a re-development agency has declared an area "blighted", seized private property, at less than market value. Then a developer buys the property and puts up apartments or condos. This happened to several homeowners who lived next to my grandparent's property. It was discovered later that these same developers had been trying to buy these properties for several years, but were refused. Somehow they found a crony in the agency and Voila!

Like this comment
Posted by Rick Pshaw
a resident of Danville
on Jan 4, 2012 at 12:07 pm


The point is not the ethics of RDAs (and I agree with you on this). The point is that the "state" seized RDA money to pay bills which it incurred with little regard for how it would pay them back. It doesn't matter if many of the RDAs were loose with ethical behavior. What matters is the socialists in Sacramento keep grabbing funds from municipalities to pay for outrageous union retirement benefits.

Just wait until the state shows up your doorstep demanding more tax dollars - it will happen rather soon...

Like this comment
Posted by Bill
a resident of another community
on Jan 4, 2012 at 4:39 pm

It's always sad when people resort to mame calling in order to make their point valid. Calling folks with a social conscience (Democrats) "socialist" is like calling people who are in it for themselves (Republicans) "facists."

Ethics are always on point.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Salami, Salami … Baloney
By Tom Cushing | 25 comments | 606 views

Time for new collaboration between city and school district
By Tim Hunt | 2 comments | 477 views