►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting March 8, 2011
8. Public Hearing to Amend Public Improvements Reimbursement Agreement Between City and Redevelopment Agency
A
Item
8
public
hearings:
we
have
a
public
hearing
this
evening,
notices
have
been
published,
posted
and
mailed
hold
the
public
hearing
to
consider
an
amendment
to
the
public
improvements,
reimbursement
agreement
between
the
city
of
San
Bruno
and
the
san
Bernard
evelopment
agency.
We
have
two
items.
The
first
one
is
adopt
a
resolution
approving
amendment
to
the
public
improvements,
reimbursement
agreement
between
the
city
and
the
Redevelopment
Agency.
The
second
one
is
item
B,
adopt
a
resolution
approving
an
amendment
to
the
public
improvements,
reimbursement
agreement
between
the
Redevelopment
Agency
and
the
city
stop
through.
B
C
Thank
you
and
good
evening,
honorable
mayor
and
members
of
the
City
Council
about
two
months
ago.
As
the
council
knows,
Governor
Brown
approve
proposed
a
budget
that
included
the
elimination
of
all
redevelopment
agencies,
and
part
of
this
proposal
will
only
allow
future
tax
increment
to
be
used
for
existing
obligations.
With
this
in
mind,
the
City
Council
approved
a
reimbursement
agreement
between
the
aging,
this
agency
in
the
city,
which
contractually
binds
the
agency
to
fund
and
support
critical
plan
for
public
improvement
projects
at
a
februari
city
council
meeting
per
the
direction
of
the
City
Council.
C
The
staff
is
now
before
you
tonight
with
a
resolution
to
amend,
to
amend
this
obligation
to
also
include
two
public
facilities,
both
the
library
that
has
been
planned
for
four
years,
as
well
as
the
station
51
renovation
or
the
new
station
51.
As
the
council
knows,
both
of
these
have
been
named
in
city
documents,
including
the
city's
general
plan,
as
well
as
the
city's
redevelopment
plan.
These
were
not
brought
forward
with
the
first
resolution,
because
there's
specific
public
noticing
requirements
that
are
entailed
whenever
public
facilities
are
going
to
be
funded,
so
those
have
been
met.
C
Those
public
noticing
requirements
and
tonight
is
the
public
hearing,
that's
also
required
by
law,
as
Jim
O'leary
has
noted
in
the
past,
although
all
the
number
of
cities
have
moved
for
with
these
obligations
or
these
contractual
obligations,
the
state's
opinion
is
that
these
will
not
suffice
in
the
end,
however,
we
do
disagree
with
that,
as
well
as
a
number
of
other
cities.
Disagree
with
that.
So
with
that
I
could
take
any
questions
regarding
this
resolution.
Any
questions.
A
D
I'd
like
to
say
something
again,
I
said
something
last
time
but
I'd
like
to
again
thank
the
staff
for
all
their
hard
work.
It
was
a
shuffle
and
not
so
much
a
hassle,
but
they
really
had
to
put
it
all
together
in
a
very
short
time
and
there's
a
lot
of
nuances
in
the
law,
and
they
have
to
do
it
right.
So
they
did
it
and
I'm
extremely
excited
that
this
might
happen.
It's
one
of
my
dreams
to
have
a
new
library
for
San
Bruno,
so
hopefully,
this'll
is
one
step
forward.
B
A
A
F
Just
wanted
to
update
you
on
the
status
of
the
consideration
to
eliminate
redevelopment
as
part
as
it
was
part
of
the
governor's
budget.
Since
you
last
acted
on
this
topic
two
weeks
ago,
there's
been
a
fair
amount
of
movement
as
we
expected
that
there
would
be.
This
is
a
very
active
period
for
the
state
legislature
in
the
governor's
office
related
to
the
annual
budget
development.
F
F
Although
our
membership
organizations
League
of
California
cities
and
the
redevelopment
California
redevelopment
Association
both
advised
that
such
the
action
to
abolish
redevelopment
would
be
unconstitutional,
that
continues
to
be
hotly
debated,
and
at
this
point
there
is
no
immediate
path
to
resolution
of
the
very
serious
issues
related
to
this
topic
in
the
and
the
state's
budget.
There
is
no
immediate
path
to
resolution.
F
Both
CRA
and
the
League
of
California
cities
have,
regrettably
been
been
pushed
to
a
position
of
coming
out
very
recently,
I
believe,
as
of
today,
identifying
that
they
will
not
support
the
governor's
proposals
for
tax
continuation,
which
are
obviously
critical
to
the
budget
that
he
has
proposed.
If
that
budget
proposal
continues
to
include
the
elimination
of
redevelopment,
so
in
summary,
I
would
simply
say
that
this
is
continues
to
be
an
open
and
very
hotly
debated
issue
that
we
still
believe
will
be
resolved
timely.