HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 2012-01RESOLUTION NO. 2012-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAKING
AN ELECTION TO SERVE AS A SUCCESSOR AGENCY UNDER PART 1.85 OF
DIVISION 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE.
A. WHEREAS, the Diamond Bar Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") is a redevelopment
agency in the City of Diamond Bar ("City"), created by the City on July 15, 1997 pursuant to the
Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 of Division 24.of the California Health and Safety Code,
commencing with Section 33000);
B. WHEREAS, on April 27 2000, in Beach Courchesne v. City of Diamond Bar, the
California Court of Appeals invalidated the Agency's sole project area;
C. WHEREAS, the Agency currently receives no tax increment or other revenue from the
State or local property taxes;
D.WHEREAS ,on June 29, 2011, the California Legislature enacted and the Governor
signed, companion bills. AB 1X 26 and AB 1X 27 requiring that each redevelopment agency within
California be dissolved. unless the`community that created it enacts an ordinance committing it to
making certain payments;
E WHEREAS, on September 20, 2011, the City Council adopted: Ordinance 5(2011),
opting to comply with the alternative voluntary redevelopment program established pursuant to AB 1X
27 to.permit the continued existence and operation of the Agency;
F. WHEREAS, in response to a lawsuit filed by the.,California Redevelopment Association
and. League of California Cities challenging AB 1X 26 and AB IX 27,. on December 29, 2011, the
California Supreme Court issued its -opinion in California Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos
(Case No. S194861) largely upholding AB 1X 26, invalidating AB 1X 27 as unconstitutional, and.
holding that AB`1X 26 may be severed from AB 1X 27 and. enforced.independently;
do
G. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court's decision in Matosantos and Ordinance 5 (2011),
because the Court invalidated AB 1X 27, Ordinance 5 (2011) is deemed null and void and of no
further. force or effect;
H. WHEREAS, the Matosantos decision provides that all redevelopment agencies shall
cease to exist on February. 1, 2012 and all authority, power and obligations previously vested in a
redevelopment agency must be transferred to a "successor agency" prior to that date;
I. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt this resolution electing for the City to
serve as the successor agency to the Agency under Fart 1.85.
2012-01