The April 20, 2012 order from state Controller John Chiang to successor agencies of county and city redevelopment agencies that reads, in part:
“If your city, county or agency, directly or indirectly, received any assets from a redevelopment agency after Jan. 1, 2011, your city, county, or agency hereby is ordered to immediately reverse the transfer and return the applicable assets to the successor agency of the relevant redevelopment agency.”…
…According to Chiang’s letter, the state order does not apply “if your city, county, or agency has, prior to June 28, 2011, contractually committed to a third party for an expenditure or encumbrance of a specific asset.”…
This is another blow to the city of Twentynine Palms’ attempt shield RDA assets from the State and local education and public safety agencies.
The city has quietly ignored this letter and in fact has not even addressed it to either the Successor Agency or the Oversight Board.
This is a big deal folks it means the city is committing a fraud if it does not address this issue.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 City meeting transferring funds
Tuesday, August 9, 2011 City meeting Scheduling Project Phoenix Planning
Tuesday, July 26, 2011, X-27 Opt-In first reading
Tuesday, May 10, 2011 purchase bonds recently issued by the City
Wednesday, March 2, 2011 1st Talk of bonds
State Controller orders 29 Palms to Reverse Property Transfers,
hey citizens what should we do with our city? is it time to fire the city? would it be posible to get enough signtures to put it on the nov ballot?
Well, this is interesting but it is not a smoking gun. Bonds are a 3rd party contract and these Bonds were offered and sold well prior to June 28, 2011.
I am pretty sure that the city has these funds from the Bonds sitting on account and waiting to hear from the DOF about the EOPS.
There may be some issues in regards to signed and executed contracts to build shovel ready projects as compared to projects that had no signed contracts and are not shovel ready like Project Phoenix.
But we will see what the State has to say sooner or later.
It is the transferring of funds that is the problem. The RDA floated the bonds… the proceeds must remain with the Successor Agency not transferred to the city coffers. I think this is a problem.
Further the successor agency is there to shut down the RDA not continue its spending or planning of new projects.
I do not disagree with any of you observations. It appears that the State is playing hardball and well could decide in terms that you outline.
I do think the Bonds were floated by the “City” and not the RDA. I will check on that.
I just checked the Bonds were floated by the RDA and not the “City”. Hmmmmm…….
The Controllers language is pretty plain. I think we are looking at a big problem here for the city. The state wants its money. The Tax Increment does not belong to the city of 29 palms’ RDA, it was merely the custodian of the tax increment… The state fired the RDAs.
Why is it that most of us here that follow politics figured this out at the beginning? Yet the guys like the city Attorney could not? It was not that confusing. The language of x26 was straight forward, even I could understand the legalese.
The Successor agency has been acting under bad legal advice and under the the direction of staff and the city manager. It’s kinda like a conspiracy even though it all appears to be legal. The public has been timed-out.
Which version of Phoenix is it they are they on on now? The one with the subterranean orchestra, or the one where the dog and pony show is featured?
Ask yourself has cityhood benefited you as a citizen?
What service has the city provided you that the county did not provide before cityhood?
In this time of belt tightening is it wise to have an extra layer of government bureaucracy that serves the connected few?
Can we as a small town afford not only a city manager that cost the taxpayers more than $300,000.00 grand a year but the new bond debt that may well cost they citizens more than $40,000,000.00.
Received a letter yesterday reminding me that the farmers market is permitted and a swap meet that might compete with it is against 29 codes. Said they would be watching and would issue a citation if I were to hold another one.
Smith’s Ranch Swap meet held on private commercial property where else is a swap meet prohibited being held at a drive in theater, .
Farmers Market subsidized by being on public street no rent or cost for a connected crony
Smith’s Ranch Swap Meet has sanitation, full restrooms including hand washing,
Farmers Market no sanitation; want to try a free sample? Better bring some washing method
Smith’s Ranch Free vending, we make a couple bucks off concessions
Farmers Market not only picks and chooses who pays a private individual to vend on public property but tries to stymy competition by influencing the council to give them code protection from those of us trying to make an extra buck.
I know this is off subject but it’s for Mark’s benefit.
Per the current Development Code 19.10, Indoor Swap Meets are authorized with a General Commercial (GC) Zone with the Approval of a Conditional use permit. Outdoor Swap Meets are prohibited.
The code dosen’t mention about competeing with a Farmer’s Market.
The way I see it you have 4 options:
1. Comply with the current code and do not hold the swap meet.
2. Apply for a CUP and hold the Swap Meet indoors.
3. Work with City Agencies to get the code changed.
4. Hold the Swap Meet anyways and face the consequences.
I think I will let a jury of my peers determin my fate, date change for the next I will call it a yard sale seems how I am not charging for vending space. The new date is sun June third, and I will make this real clear for those vindictive asses at the city, this is a free market,it iis not a swap meet.
Pingback: Let’s Recap this Project Phoenix thing | Cactus Thorns