Fight for Redevelopment Agencies Continues

There might be hope for Loma Linda and cities around the Inland Empire who had come to rely on redevelopment agencies now that the California Supreme Court has agreed to take the petition filed by the League of California Cities and California Redevelopment Association that challenges the constitutionality of bills that eliminate redevelopment agencies.

The court also granted part of a requested stay, that in effect, postpones required payments for cities who want to keep their RDA under a newly established redevelopment system until a ruling is made, officials said.

 “We’re very gratified that the California Supreme Court has agreed to take our case, issued the stay we requested to preserve the status quo, and that it is moving forward on an expedited basis,” said Chris McKenzie, Executive Director, League of California Cities. “The redevelopment bills are unconstitutional, violating Proposition 22 and other provisions of the state constitution. We look forward to presenting our case to the court very soon. We’re confident the State Supreme Court will ultimately strike down this unconstitutional legislation that ignores the voters’ will and that will destroy local economies.”

Loma Linda has been closely following the petition, filed in mid-July. The suit challenges AB 1x26, which eliminates the agencies in their current form, and AB 1x27, which allows their RDA to exist as long as the city pays into a fund that would used for the state’s educational system, state officials said.

The bills were signed by Governor Jerry Brown in June. The petition's central claim in the lawsuit is that AB 1X 26&27 violate Proposition 22, the constitutional amendment passed by California voters in November 2010, just eight months ago.

The court is working to schedule oral arguments before the end of the year. A decision could be made before Jan. 15, the date when redevelopment agencies are required to make their first payment, officials said.

On July 26, Loma Linda’s City Council approved a non-binding resolution declaring its intent to participate in a state-designed program that allows cities to keep their redevelopment agencies.

But they made it known they feel they are being forced to make ransom payments.

City officials estimated it would cost $2.839 million a year to keep their redevelopment under AB 1x27.