The California Supreme Court made a decision in the fate of hundreds of redevelopment agencies on the legality of seizing $1.7 billion in redevelopment money to balance California’s budget.
Redevelopment agencies in the bay area filed a lawsuit against the state’s budget plan earlier this year, contending that it violates Proposition 22, a measure that bars the state from diverting local funding, including redevelopment revenue, to pay its bills. But state lawmakers and Governor Brown insist the Legislature has the final word over redevelopment funds.
This morning, the court ruled that Governor Brown and the Legislature have the authority to eliminate municipal redevelopment agencies, but not force them to redirect their taxes to local services. The state is not allowed to impose new funding requirements. Eliminating some 400 redevelopment agencies could boost this year's state budget by about $1.7 billion.
What does the court's decision mean to redevelopment agencies? Will it help close the state budget shortfall? If the redevelopment agencies appeal the decision, what are their chances of staying afloat?
Julie Small, KPCC Capitol Reporter
Chris Norby, Republican California State Assemblyman, represents 72nd district including Fullerton