City of Fresno v. Dept. of Finance CA3

BACKGROUND

A Before June 2011, the Community Redevelopment Law (§ 33000, et seq.) authorized RDAs to remediate urban decay and revitalize blighted communities. (California Redevelopment Assn. v. Matosantos (2011) 53 Cal.4th 231, 246 (Matosantos).) To finance their activities, RDAs relied on “tax increment” financing --

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code.

2 Other loans were also disputed but are not at issue in this appeal.

3 We will refer to the appellants collectively as Finance and to the respondents collectively as Fresno.

2 tax revenue attributed to the increased value of property in the redevelopment project area. (Ibid.) In June 2011, the Legislature passed Assembly Bill No. 26 (2011-2012 1st Ex. Sess.) (Assembly Bill XI 26), which dissolved RDAs and turned over the winding-down process to successor agencies. (Matosantos, supra, 53 Cal.4th at pp. 250-251.) The Legislature later adopted additional relevant provisions. (Stats. 2012, ch. 26, § 6 (Assembly Bill No. 1484 (2011-2012 Reg. Sess.).) We will refer to the legislation dissolving RDAs, collectively, as the “Dissolution Law.”4 The Dissolution Law generally made agreements between an…