HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 02-2015 RESOLUTION NO. 02-2015
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ENTER INTO A REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT FOR
COMMERCIAL SPACE AT 636 EL CAMINO REAL WITH THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO,COUNTY OF SAN
MATEO, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, SAN MATEO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT, SAN MATEO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT COLMA CREEK FLOOD CONTROL ZONE,WILLOW
GARDENS PARKS AND PARKWAYS MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT, SAN MATEO COUNTY RESOURCE
CONSERVATION DISTRICT, BAY AREA AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND SAN MATEO COUNTY
HARBOR DISTRICT
WHEREAS, In March 2011 the former Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San
Francisco ("RDA"), ground-leased certain real property to the Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition
("MPHC")and provided a loan,using its housing and non-housing funds,to MPHC for the purpose
of development of a mixed-use affordable housing project to be located at 636 El Camino Real in the
City of South San Francisco. Substantially concurrently therewith, pursuant to a Master Lease
Agreement the RDA leased back from MPHC a portion of the property to be developed as
commercial retail space and associated parking, for a term of 75 years.
WHEREAS,Pursuant to the Master Lease Agreement,MPHC agreed to pay a one-time sum
to the RDA to be used for commercial tenant improvements, and the RDA agreed to make tenant
improvements for its subtenants.
WHEREAS,The California Legislature enacted ABx1-26,effective as of June 30,2011, as
interpreted and modified on December 29, 2011 by the California Supreme Court in California
Redevelopment Association v.Matosantos. Pursuant thereto,the RDA was dissolved effective as of
February 1,2012. Successor agencies to redevelopment agencies were charged with administering
redevelopment activities and winding down redevelopment for the benefit of holders of enforceable
obligations and the taxing entities that would receive certain real property tax increment formerly
paid to redevelopment agencies. The actions of successor agencies were to be overseen by local
"oversight boards"established by ABx 1-26,with additional review and approval authority residing
in the California Department of Finance ("DOF").
WHEREAS, On January 25,2012,pursuant to Resolution No. 8-2012,the City Council of
the City elected to serve as Successor Agency to the RDA and to retain the housing assets and
functions of the RDA in its capacity as housing successor.
WHEREAS,On July 27,2012,the California Legislature enacted AB 1484,which modified
ABx1-26 by, among other things, clarifying that a redevelopment successor agency is a separate
public entity from the public agency that provides for its governance. ABx1-26 and AB 1484 are
referred to collectively herein as the "Redevelopment Dissolution Law."
WHEREAS, Accordingly, on July 25, 2012, pursuant to Resolution No. 06-2012, the
Successor Agency affirmed that it is a separate public entity from the City and provided for its
governance.
WHEREAS, On August 31, 2012, pursuant to the Redevelopment Dissolution Law, DOF
determined that the land leased to MPHC and the loan made to MPHC by the RDA were housing
assets and authorized their transfer to the City as housing successor to the RDA.
WHEREAS, In September 2012 MPHC completed construction of a 109-unit affordable
housing development,with approximately 5,700 square feet of unimproved commercial space and
associated parking, at 636 El Camino Real (the "Development").
WHEREAS,Because the Development contains approximately 5,160 square feet of retail
space, it is subject to Health and Safety Code Section 34176(f), enacted as part of the
Redevelopment Dissolution Law,which provides as follows: "If a development includes both low-
and moderate-income housing that meets the definition of a housing asset under subdivision(e)and
other types of property use,including,but not limited to, commercial use, governmental use, open
space,and parks,the oversight board shall consider the overall value to the community as well as the
benefit to taxing entities of keeping the entire development intact or dividing the title and control
over the property between the housing successor and the successor agency or other public or private
agencies. The disposition of those assets may be accomplished by a revenue-sharing arrangement as
approved by the oversight board on behalf of the affected taxing entities."
WHEREAS,On April 16,2013,the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency reviewed the
Development at a public meeting. Pursuant to OB Resolution No. 12-2013, the Oversight Board
approved the assignment of the Commercial Portion of the Master Lease Agreement from the
Successor Agency to the City, which administers the housing portion of the Master Lease
Agreement. The Oversight Board found that the City held title to the entire property as housing
successor to the RDA, and that such assignment would facilitate the construction of tenant
improvements for the three commercial tenant spaces and the collection of rents therefor and benefit
the taxing entities. The Oversight Board also directed staff to present terms for a revenue-sharing
arrangement with the taxing entities, which terms have been presented to and approved by the
Oversight Board.
WHEREAS, Two of the three spaces in the Commercial Portion of the Development have
been improved by the City as housing successor, using funds from MPHC pursuant to the Master
Lease Agreement and have been subleased to subtenants. Funds for the final tenant improvements
have been approved by the Oversight Board and DOF as enforceable obligations on the Recognized
Obligations Payment Schedule("ROPS")14-15B and future ROPS until those tenant improvements
have been completed.
WHEREAS, The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement in order to comply with the
Redevelopment Dissolution Law and, specifically, Health and Safety Code Section 34176(f).
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby
resolve as follows:
1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct,and are incorporated herein by reference.
2. The Agreement, substantially in the form attached hereto, is hereby approved, and the
City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute it on behalf of the City; to make
revisions to the Agreement,with review and approval by the City Attorney,which do not materially
or substantially increase the Agency's obligations thereunder; to sign all documents; to make all
approvals and take all actions necessary or appropriate to carry out and implement the intent of this
Resolution.
* * * * *
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the
City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of January,
2015 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Karyl Matsumoto, Pradeep Gupta, and Liza Normandy
Vice Mayor Mark N. Addiego and Mayor Richard A. Garbarino
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
A TEST..
Krista M. , , City '