Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> i <br /> I <br /> MAYOR CITY MANAGER <br /> Miguel A. Pulido Paul M. Walters <br /> MAYOR PRO TEM CITY ATTORNEY <br /> Claudia C. Alvarez Sonia R. Carvalho <br /> COUNCILMEMBERS CLERK OF THE COUNCIL <br /> P. David Benavides Maria D. Huizar <br /> Carlos Bustamante - <br /> Michele Martinez <br /> Vincent Sarmiento <br /> Sal Tinaje ro CITY OF SANTA ANA <br /> 20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA • P.O. BOX 1988 <br /> SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 <br /> Via Hand-Delivery <br /> August 2, 2012 <br /> <br /> Jan E. Grimes <br /> Chief Deputy Auditor-Controller <br /> Orange County Auditor-Controller <br /> 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 200 <br /> Santa Ana, CA 92702-0567 <br /> <br /> RE: AB 1484 DEMAND FOR PAYMENT I <br /> <br /> Dear Ms. Grimes: <br /> i, <br /> The City of Santa Ana acting as Successor Agency to the former Community Redevelopment Agency <br /> ("Successor Agency") is in receipt of correspondence dated July 27, 2012 demanding payment in the <br /> amount of One Million One Hundred Sixty Thousand and Ninety-Seven Dollars ($1,160,097.00) by <br /> August 3, 2012. The Successor Agency has enclosed a check in the requested amount, but hereby asserts <br /> its disagreement with the calculation and submits this check under protest. <br /> The Department of Finance (DOF) considers the property tax increment revenues received by the former <br /> redevelopment agencies from July 2011 through January 2012 as part of the Redevelopment Property Tax <br /> Trust Fund (RPTTF) that can be distributed to various taxing entities. However, the RPTTF did not exist <br /> until February 1, 2012; the effective date of AB lx 26. In addition, <br /> Y ~ DOF s calculation does not factor in <br /> the possibility that former redevelopment agencies may have needed to utilize the tax increment revenues <br /> received during July 2011 through January 2012 to make enforceable obligation payments due during the <br /> same period. <br /> In addition, the Successor Agency is involved in current and pending litigation regarding various <br /> agreements included on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules (ROPS) that DOF has disallowed <br /> as enforceable obligations. The Successor Agency is still disputing DOF's decision, but has been <br /> unsuccessful in engaging DOF in further dialogue to remedy the problem. Therefore, the amounts <br /> approved by DOF on both the January - June 2012 and July - December 2012 ROPS are not reflective of <br /> the true obligation amounts for each respective period. If the correct ROPS amounts are used in the AB <br /> 1484 "True Up" process calculation, the County would have no need to demand the return of any prior tax <br /> increment revenues from the Successor Agency. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> EXHIBIT 1 <br /> 2-3 <br />