Stanislaus leaders join fight to block redevelopment bill

Elected officials from cities in Stanislaus County gathered Monday to support a lawsuit that aims to save redevelopment agencies in California.

The League of California Cities and other groups are asking the state Supreme Court for a ruling to block budget legislation that requires local governments to shut down their redevelopment agencies by Oct. 1. Gov. Jerry Brown recently signed the bills.

Officials from Modesto, Turlock, Riverbank, Oakdale, Patterson and other cities attended the league-organized event at Tenth Street Place in downtown Modesto. County Supervisor Jim DeMartini was also on hand.

On display was a mock note suggesting the state was holding redevelopment agencies for ransom of $1.7 billion. The state would allow cities and counties to continue with redevelopment projects if they dedicate $1.7 billion to public schools.

"What the state is doing to local government is wrong," Riverbank Mayor Virginia Madueño said.

Modesto Councilman Brad Hawn stood in for Mayor Jim Ridenour, the president of the League of California Cities, who was on vacation.

"What this does is take away the one tool local government has to spur the economy," Hawn said.

Proposition 22 defied?

Modesto Centre Plaza and other downtown revitalization efforts are often cited as products of the redevelopment process. Modesto officials warned that the legislation could kill projects including the Kansas-Woodland Business Park, downtown streetside improvements, the 76-unit Archway Commons affordable housing complex and 18 senior apartments on Downey Avenue.

It also could put the kibosh on improvements in Turlock.

Speakers charged that state leaders are ignoring the redevelopment provisions in the state constitution and defying Proposition 22, which was supposed to outlaw state raids on local revenue. Sixty-one percent of California voters approved the initiative in November.

"Proposition 22 could not be more clear," Turlock Mayor John Lazar said. "Now, the cities are forced to sue in court to uphold the constitution and the will of the voters."

The California Redevelopment Association joined the league, San Jose and Union City in filing the petition Monday with the Supreme Court.

League spokesman Stephen Qualls said they are asking for a decision by Aug. 15.

Modesto officials have doubted the city could make its share of the payments to keep its redevelopment agency in business. In addition to the $1.7 billion the first year, local governments would be responsible for a share of $400 million in annual payments.

Redevelopment agencies capture a share of local property-tax dollars to fund projects that eliminate blight. Critics of redevelopment charge the money would be better spent on education or other public services.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, defended the Legislature's action as legal and said redevelopment needs must be weighed against those of education.

"This is not the agencies' money nor the state's — it is the taxpayers'," Steinberg said in a statement. "We must all balance important priorities in tough times."

Cities and redevelopment agencies said they filed suit because the budget plan affects cities across the state and only the Supreme Court can act authoritatively before the first payment is due in January.

Lawmakers agreed to the two-bill proposal, Assembly Bills X1 26 and X1 27, in a mostly party-line vote in June. The lawsuit asks the court to block implementation of the bills until the case can be resolved.

The Sacramento Bee contributed to this report.

Bee staff writer Ken Carlson can be reached at kcarlson@modbee.com or (209) 578-2321.