MO 2012-003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS • Agency will continue work on establishment of a Business Assessment District to construct Eden Road, currently a dirt road, to improve traffic circulation in the Davis/Doolittle intersection and provide necessary access to currently blighted properties. Housing • Issuance of tax exempt bonds for the Alameda at San Leandro Crossings once the nonprofit housing developer, BRIDGE Housing Corporation, is ready to proceed with construction. The bonds will be repaid through the $9.1 million Set -Aside loan discussed above and approved by the Redevelopment Agency in 2009. . ECONOMIC FACTORS Tax increment revenue for all project areas grew 1.2% in Fiscal Year 2010 -11. Tax increment revenue in the Plaza Project Area decreased by 1.2% in Fiscal Year 2010 -11. Tax increment growth in the Joint Project Area grew 1.7% in Fiscal Year 2010 -11 while growth in the West San Leandro /MacArthur Boulevard Project Area was 3.2 %. Minimal growth in tax increment revenue is projected for the next fiscal year, with a return to modest growth of approximately 2% thereafter. In Fiscal Year 2010 -11 the State required a payment of approximately $900,000 in tax increment from the City of San Leandro Redevelopment Agency. That same State legislation required an ° additional payment of $4.2 million in 2009 -10. The California Redevelopment Association has appealed a court decision upholding the legality of those payments although the timeline for a decision is unknown. The State take decimated the Redevelopment Agency's fund balance and has negatively impacted funding of programs and projects in the short-term. Should the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program be upheld, the Agency will be required to make sizable annual payments beginning in 2011 -12 in order to continue operating. In that case, the Agency would be unable to undertake major investments for several years into the future. Even if the Alternative Voluntary Redevelopment Program is not upheld, there is a possibility of additional State actions threatening the existence of redevelopment agencies in the future. Until the status of redevelopment in California becomes more stable, staff will prioritize projects for which funding has already been secured, and non - capital intensive programs. 13