Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Facebook
Twitter
Google+1
del.icio.us.
Digg!
Yahoo! Buzz
Diigo
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Yahoo!
MyspaceGovernor Jerry Brown’s proposal to save $1.7 billion a year by eliminating all the statewide redevelopment agencies will cost the City of Santa Barbara Redevelopment Agency approximately $12 million a year, according to initial, and admittedly rough, estimates. Brown’s plans were unveiled Monday as the governor provided the first specifics about his plans to address a $28-billion shortfall.
Redevelopment agencies were authorized by state law to allow local government agencies to fight blight by incurring debt to invest in underdeveloped neighborhoods. They’ve been the subject of considerable controversy in part because of the liberal definition afforded to “blight” and because such agencies have been allowed to pocket increases in property tax assessments that might otherwise have gone to competing government agencies, most notably school districts. If Brown’s plan is approved by the Legislature, it appears Santa Barbara’s Redevelopment Agency will lose $12 million of the $20 million it generates a year. (The remaining $8 million has already been authorized to pay off existing debts.) Of that, roughly $4 million a year has been spent on affordable housing, and the rest on downtown improvements. The Paseo Nuevo mall in downtown Santa Barbara, for example, could never have been built without massive investments by the Redevelopment Agency.
On a less grand scale, the Redevelopment Agency is now poised to spend $50,000 to rearrange the benches on the 800 and 900 blocks of State Street in hopes of discouraging panhandlers who perch there. Currently, those benches face passersby walking down the street; the plan is have them situated perpendicular to the flow of pedestrian traffic. This plan was pushed by the Downtown Organization, whose members have grown increasingly restive about panhandlers and street people. Likewise, the City Council’s Finance Committee voted to authorize the Redevelopment Agency to spend $3.5 million to buy two downtown properties that could be used later for the development of affordable housing. The big winner, should Brown’s plan pass, would be the school districts surrounding Santa Barbara, who could find their property tax revenues increase by $5.4 million a year. With or without Brown’s action, Santa Barbara’s Redevelopment Agency has a limited life expectancy, as its legal expiration date will occur in 2015.
Previous Month
Comments
There is very little difference between Brown's budget proposals and previous budgets, because Brown's budget is master-minded by the oil industry.There is no provision for closing corporate tax loopholes, no oil extraction tax and no oil corporation, windfall profits tax. Californians pay the highest price for gasoline in the nation. Brown's budget is the same, because again, it picks on the most vulnerable. Jerry appears to be working for Big Oil and not for the Californians who voted for him.
EarlRichards (anonymous profile)
January 13, 2011 at 2:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
$50,000 to move benches around? Anyone need a better example of waste and frivolous spending byour government? There are laws on the books regarding panhandling. We have a police force. Draw the obvious conclusion.
Maybe Brown's budget is no different from Arnold's because unless the state takes on the unions directly, there are no other solutions. Jerry doesn't work for big oil; he works for the unions, i.e. he HIS working for those who he sees as responsible for his election success. Eliminate public employee unions; eliminate the problem.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
January 13, 2011 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the Unions may disagree with your pat, standard, mindless rhetoric.
"Meanwhile other labor activists said Brown was hardly a real friend of workers, describing his support of Oakland police attacking longshore workers and privatization of education and other services.
Teacher and Oakland Education Association union leader Jack Gerson said in a video posted last spring:
"Jerry Brown was a huge advocate of charter schools, and started two directly himself,” referring to an arts school and a military institute. Gerson said that during Brown’s tenure in Oakland, the number of charter schools roughly doubled and the number of charter school students quadrupled from about 2,000 to 8,000. “Jerry Brown is the biggest ally to privatization of education in the U.S."
ILWU Local 10 longshore union executive board member Jack Heyman noted that Brown supported the union in 1998, “but it was a totally opportunistic move on Brown’s part…he was trying to build a base of support running for mayor of Oakland.”
“Who showed up but Jerry Brown, because the cameras were rolling and the radio stations were there. So he got publicity for himself under the guise of supporting labor. But Jerry Brown is for Jerry Brown, and he always has been.”
Heyman noted that Brown "gave the green light' for Oakland police to brutally attack longshoremen and other picketers at an anti-war protest on the docks in 2003.
“It’s hypocritical – not only does he claim to stand for labor, but for civil liberties and people’s right to free speech,” Heyman said. "It's hypocritical on his part because not only does he claim to stand for labor, but he claims to stand for civil liberties, for people's right to free speech...but here he was giving the green light for police to attack not only anti-war protesters but longshoremen in the port."
http://www.inthesetimes.com/working/e...
tabatha (anonymous profile)
January 13, 2011 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
>Currently, those benches face passersby walking down the >street; the plan is have them situated perpendicular to the flow >of pedestrian traffic
Speed bumps for pedestrians?
locke (anonymous profile)
January 13, 2011 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The SB redevelopment agency did some nice projects but times are different. Looking at their current project list it is time to shut it down and let the money flow to schools and safety.
Our schools are in dire shape and the city is looking to use RDA money for moving benches, bricking sidewalks and remodeling De La Guerra Plaza.
But what the City is really worried about is losing the millions a year they divert from the RDA for planning, oversight, and administration (read city employee salaries, benefits and pensions).
Let's not wait until 2015 .. close it down now.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
January 13, 2011 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
$50,000 to give a few benches on State Street a 90 degree turn, when sidewalks a few blocks away are so impacted by tree roots that the pavement buckles and is impassable to the disabled? The city RDA only cares about the tourist areas, and neglects the rest of the city.
The cut in funding for that kind of nonsense cannot come soon enough.
blackpoodles (anonymous profile)
January 16, 2011 at 3:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)