Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 2011-08-24 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES 4 111 N REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY :Pv. OF THE ' co CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO O cam o i& Meeting to be held at: MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING COMMUNITY ROOM 33 ARROYO DRIVE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 2011 1. Call to Order. Time: 6:35 p.m. 2. Roll Call. Present: Boardmembers Addiego, Gonzalez and Matsumoto, Vice Chairman Garbarino and Chairman Mullin. Absent: None. 3. Agenda Review. None. 4. Public Comments — comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. None. CONSENT CALENDAR 5. Motion to approve the minutes of July 13, 2011. 6. Motion to approve the expense claims of August 24, 2011. 7. Motion to accept the Miller Avenue Parking Structure Project (Project No. pfl 012) as complete in accordance with the plans and specifications. Motion — Boardmember Addiego /Second — Boardmember Gonzalez: to approve Consent Calendar Items No. 5 and 6. Unanimously approved by voice vote. Item No. 7 — While she had not voted in favor of it, Boardmember Matsumoto was pleased with the completion of the parking structure overall but requested clarification as to some of the change in numbers regarding the contract. Public Works Director explained the contract had been approved for $8,421,500 to C. Overra and in the process there was an anticipated $1 million in change orders. There had been $400,000 in construction change orders related to C. Overra's construction of the parking structure. The breezeway improvements were $408,000 worth of work. Roughly $250,000 of the $398,000 represents the geo- thermal board settlement. The remainder was a mixture of smaller issues that were not individually listed. $11 million was the current amount for construction costs, adding on additional costs for breezeway construction. Our actual expenditures were $10 million for construction. Not listed were expenses related to design, tear down costs and other non - construction costs. Boardmember Matsumoto understood that there had been delays but wanted to congratulate the department on a job well done. She had no further comments. Motion — Boardmember Matsumoto /Second — Boardmember Addiego: to accept the Miller Avenue Parking Structure Project (Project No. pfl 012) as complete in accordance with the plans and specifications. Unanimously approved by voice vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 8. Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco adopting an Enforceable Obligations Payment Schedule. Finance Director Jim Steele presented the staff report recommending the Agency adopt the resolution adopting an Enforceable Obligations Payment Schedule ( "EOPS "). Director Steele defined "enforceable obligations." Director Steele reminded board members in the last week of the last legislative session two (2) measures were passed affecting the Agency. Under AB26 Agency would be dissolved and the purpose of the EOPS was to protect Agency assets so that they will be available for distribution to taxing entities upon dissolution. Under AB27, the Agency would continue in existence if the legislative body of the Agency's sponsoring entity (the City Council) adopts and ordinance committing to pay specified amounts for distribution to schools and other taxing entities throughout the life of the Agency. Director Steele went on to explain that CA Supreme Court action put on hold provisions for those bills and allowed Health and Safety Code Sections 34169 to remain in effect. Therefore, the City was now required to adopt an EOPS by August 28, 2011. A revised payment obligation was provided to Council. The EOPS must be adopted at a public meeting and posted on the City's website. In addition, it must be transmitted to the San Mateo County Auditor Controller, the State Controller and the State Department and Finance. The EOPS is amendable at any future public meeting. A final note was the resolution needed to be amended to fix the "Total Outstanding" column to add the amount from the "Total Due During Fiscal Year" column. Councilwoman Matsumoto questioned the potential exposure to the General Fund. Attorney Mattas stated there were two issues: (1) AB26 was written such that the Agency would either be dissolved or the City could elect to opt in to the new redevelopment agency authorized in AB 27. The Supreme Court has established a timeline that goes beyond that written in AB26 and AB27. An anticipated decision on the validity of the bills from the Court was expected in January/February, thus the EOPS authorizes the Agency to pay its obligations through the remainder of the calendar year, but it also required the reporting of the maximum obligation amount that could be paid over the life of the Redevelopment Agency, projected out over 30 years; and (2) a number of agreements had been entered into that obligated the City to do certain SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 24, 2011 MINUTES PAGE 2 things upon payment by the Agency. If approval of the voluntary opt in was granted, those agreements remain valid under AB27 but could be amended due to the likelihood of there being less money. Under AB26, there was a retroactive clause that would make any agreement solely between the Agency and the City entered into after January 1 not qualify as an enforceable obligation. The General fund itself would not be at risk because either they would be paid by the Agency under AB27 or they would be void under AB26. Attorney Mattas noted any agreement involving a third party would still be enforceable. Mayor Mullin sought clarification as to what was meant by third party. Attorney Mattas explained it as any party other than the City or the Redevelopment Agency. Boardmember Gonzalez questioned if the Agency or City would lose money in participating in "pay to play." Attorney Mattas explained the City would not lose any funds, however the Agency would lose $15 million in the first year and between $3 to 6 million on a yearly basis over the life of the Agency. Boardmember Addiego stated of the approximate $1 billion pointed out, over $300 million of that was pass - throughs that go to all the other government agencies and entities over that lifetime. He expressed confusion over the years of activity. He recalled when the Agencies had I merged it had been for a 40 year time frame. Attorney Mattas noted that the fiscally merged plans still had different termination dates, and named the El Camino Redevelopment Plan and the Downtown Central Added or Marina area as the two (2) with the longest horizons. Boardmember Addiego clarified it was not about the bond time, but rather the life of the plan and the ability to make payments. Attorney Mattas confirmed. Finance Director Steele and Attorney Mattas recommended that the Agency approve the resolution and that the attachment to the resolution be modified to include the costs identified for this year in the column that included the total costs over the life of the project areas. Motion - Vice Chairman Garbarino /Second - Boardmember Addiego: to approve Resolution No. 25 -2011. Unanimously approved by voice vote. 9. Adjournment. Being no further business, Chairman Mullin adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. Submitted by: Approved by: CLIAA/■-p-er-. .---TArt..-9 4 1 V - IA\ MA Anna M. Brown Kevin Mullin Deputy City Clerk, City of South San Francisco Mayor, City of South San Francisco SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 24, 2011 PAGE 3 MINUTES