Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Santa Ana Successor Agency General <br /> Dispute Issue: <br /> <br /> DOF Waiver of Obiections to RODS <br /> Pursuant to Section 34179, as it read prior to June 27, 2012, the DOF had three business <br /> days to request review of the BOPS and, Wit requested review within that three clay tine period, <br /> the DOF had ten days to approve or reject enforceable obligations included on tile ROIIS-' <br /> The ROPS for January-June 2012 was submitted to the DOF Oil April 16, 2012_ DOF did <br /> not submit a request to review the January-June 2012 RODS until April 23, 2012 at 5:22 p.m., <br /> via e-mail; thus, DOF's request to review the January-June 2012 BOPS was received more than <br /> three business days (in fact, a full week) following submission ofthiS RODS to the DOF_ The <br /> Successor Agency did not receive a letter from the DOF rejecting items included on the January- <br /> June 2012 RODS until May 3, 2012 at 7:33 p.tn_, after close of business on the tenth day <br /> following DOF's request to review this BOPS. <br /> Further, the Successor Agency submitted the July-December 2012 ROPS to the DOF on <br /> May 9, 2012. The DOF requested review of this RODS on May 14, 2012, but did not provide a <br /> response rejecting itetrts on the July-December 2012 BOPS until alter close OfbuSit7ess (at 9:34 <br /> p.m.) on May 24, 2012. <br /> We hereby reserve our right to challenge the DOF's requests for review and rejections of <br /> the RODS as untimely and to assert that the DOIP waived its right to obiect to the inclusion of <br /> enforceable obligations on the RODS. <br /> Santa Ana Successor Agency Dispute on <br /> Overall Project Costs Items: <br /> In our III-St two RODS, DOF moved legitimate project costs into "Administrative" costs- This <br /> was contrary to DOF's own position (set forth in -Exhibit 4" on the DOF webpage devoted to <br /> A13X 1 26 issues) which treaILS such costs as --specific project implementation activities such as <br /> construction inspection, project management or actual COnstruCtion j Which I would not be viewed <br /> by finance as `administrative.- Recently enacted AB 1484 further reinforces this position. <br /> I All 1484 extended these time periods to tive business clays for the DUI' to request review and 45 days to <br /> respond with approvals and/or disapprovals of specified items on the RODS: however no part ol'AB 1484 was made <br /> retroactive: therefore the DOF was required to act within the time periods in effect at the time the RODS was <br /> submitted, and resubmitted, to the DOF. <br /> Pl'I v I ,1 `7 <br /> 3-25 <br />