We know we have two and possibly three Councilmen being held hostage at the hands of City Manager Richard N. Warne and his hired guns RSG and Rutan and Tucker.
Tuesday’s Council Meeting was canceled Knowing Full Well that the county would be sending the City a huge monetary demand on the morning of that meeting. Yet Warne cancels the meeting and decides to go completely rogue on the City Council and Write a check for $193,037.00 with out approval of the Council.
He has so little regard for the Council he has a frigging THIRD PARTY send the Council a email telling them that they are not needed to complete the transaction.
From: Matt McCleary [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 3:41 PM
To: jcole; ogillick; jerry; korinacole; lizmeyer920@;firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Cc: Jay Corbin; jklink; j.harris; dmintz; Ron Peck; Charles LaClaire; Munoz, Patrick; Ihrke, Bill; Fuentes, Dena
Subject: 29 Palms Oversight Board Update – July 9, 2012
Good afternoon 29 Palms Oversight Board members. Several correspondences have occurred today between Successor Agency staff and the County which we wanted to bring to your attention.
As general background (and per what we advised you of last week) according to AB1484, by July 9, 2012, county auditor-controllers are required to notify each successor agency of any “residual” property tax revenues it owes to affected taxing entities for the Jan-Jun2012 ROPS period. Keep in mind, the State believes that former redevelopment agencies received property tax revenue form July 1, 2011, to January 31, 2012, to pay for the Jan-June ROPS. In essence, the State wants to go back through FY 2011-12 and make sure the former redevelopment agencies/successor agencies:
1. Paid their proper share of passthroughs to the affected taxing entities
2. Were not allocated more revenue than what they needed to pay obligations listed on the Jan-June ROPS.
By July 12, 2012, successor agencies must make these “residual” payments to the county auditor-controller.
As seems to be the case with everything in the “Post Redevelopment World” there is much confusion over the amount of the residual payment that applies to 29Palms. For the last few days, communications have been occurring between the County, the Successor Agency, and the DOF regarding the calculation of these “residual” payments. According to the Law, the County Auditor Tax Collectors’ (ATC) is ultimately responsible to determine the proper payment amount, but confusion exists as to how the ATC must calculate the amount of “residual” revenue in AB1484 that the former 29 Palms Redevelopment Agency was allocated between July 1, 2011, and January 31, 2012. (Again, this money must be used for Jan-June ROPS) As of today, the ATC has advised staff that they are still attempting to calculate the residual amount, and at this point all we know is that it will be between approximately $173,000 and $193,000 depending on the method used in calculating this “residual.” The ATC is going to try to talk to DOF this afternoon and attempt to resolve this issue. If the ATC is unsuccessful in sorting it out, it will default by using the higher amount since AB 1484 states the County must issue the “residual” number by the end of the day today or risk the State withholding the County’s sales and use taxes.
In the end, the 29 Palms Successor Agency is looking at cutting a check for either approximately $173,000 or $193,000 to the County by Thursday this week, the payment deadline outlined in AB 1484. Given the Successor Agency’s cash position, regardless of which number is used, this payment will likely come from former affordable housing set aside funds. The Successor Agency has no choice other than to pay the amount in question or risk significant penalties, including specifically the State withholding sales and use tax from the City.
Please keep in mind this is provided for informational purposes only and you should not hit “reply all” to this email. Please be mindful of the fact the Brown Act continues to apply to your communications.
309 West 4th Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701-4502
Facebook: Click Here
LinkedIn: Click Here
Click here to receive valuable information from RSG.
*A Hobson’s choice is a free choice in which only one option is offered. As a person may refuse to take that option, the choice is therefore between taking the option or not; “take it or leave it”. The phrase is said to originate with Thomas Hobson (1544–1631), a livery stable owner in Cambridge, England. To rotate the use of his horses, he offered customers the choice of either taking the horse in the stall nearest the door or taking none at all.
Incoming search terms:
- J Guzzetta@29palms org
- jguzzetta@29palms org