This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

City Will Pay State $676,000 to Keep Redevelopment Program

New state law requires local CRA's be eliminated or that cities pay a "ransom" to keep the programs going.

Council Members found themselves with a tough decision to ponder at their most recent meeting when they had to consider giving up funds in the Community Redeveloping Agency (CRA) or opt to pay a portion of the Agency’s revenues to various State and County agencies annually in order to keep the CRA operational.

The discussions followed a heated debate over a . Needless to say, the room was already fired up.

The CRA was created to allow cities such as Sierra Madre to put aside monies outside the General Fund for particular redevelopment projects, such as creating low to moderate income housing, improve public facilities and maintain the City’s infrastructure.

Find out what's happening in Sierra Madrewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Upon taking office, Governor Jerry Brown proposed elimination of the CRA statewide, wanting instead to use its monies to pay down the State dept and redistribute it to the school districts and other goverment agencies. 

City staff reccomended that the council give a first reading of Ordinance 1320, which explains the terms of the Voluntary Alternative Redevelopment Plan and adopt Urgency Ordinance U-1320, amending the Redevelopment Plan as originally adopted in 1977.

Find out what's happening in Sierra Madrewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

With this "opt-in" alternative, the city would pay an initial installment of approximately $676,000 of its CRA zone tax revenue to the state, with payments of approximately $160,000 to be made in subsequent years.

Council Member MaryAnn MacGillivray, who noted that she was not a fan of the CRA due to restrictions placed on fund usage, came prepared with a whiteboard presentation outlining how much Sierra Madre would be giving up to the state if it was to completely give up the CRA funds.

Within the remaining 5-year lifespan, approximately $2.5 million would be given to the State if the CRA was to be dissolved.

MacGillivray referred to it as “The California State anarchy take-away.” 

“And just watch the way they distribute it,” MacGillivray said. “To trust the state to do anything reasonable with the money is an unreasonable proposition.”

During the Public Comment portion of the meeting, resident Barbara Lee asked the council to outline what projects had been undertaken thus far using CRA funds. Lee went on to suggest doing away with the CRA and concentrating on repaying bond debt and other monies owed.

Resident John Cappocia was leery of moving forward until the public becomes more informed of the details of the two offered options.

“I would propose that you obey this and come up with some more information to present to the public about the pros and cons of whether we do away with it or proceed with it,” Cappocia said.

Another resident, Chris Koerber, questioned the idea of making payments to the state.

“Why does Sierra Madre want to spend $676,000 and an assumed cost of $160,000… and we are making one big assumption… that is that the state won’t raise the $160,000,” Koerber said.

Koerber also suggested doing away with the CRA. “Now is the time to declare that Sierra Madre’s CRA did not accomplish its goal,” he said.

Mayor John Buchanan took some time to point out some of the projects that the CRA helped fund over the years, including the repair of the water main in the Redevelopment Agency area, the and the building of itself.

It was also noted by City Attorney Terri Highsmith that if the council decided to do away with the CRA program completely, all funds would go with it. None of the funds can be redistributed to the city's General Fund.

After some brief discussion over the numbers and who will get what and when, the council voted to adopt Urgency Ordinance U-1320 and passed the first reading of Ordinance 1320, with a second reading and further discussion to take place at the next meeting on August 9.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?

More from Sierra Madre