Notice: This is not a City of Long Beach site.

Dear Readers: Please note that this is not a City of Long Beach website and is not paid for nor maintained by taxpayer funds.

If you contact Gerrie Schipske through this site on any matter pertaining to the City of Long Beach, a copy of your contact will be forwarded to her official city email as an official public record.

Monday, February 20, 2012

What the City Might Owe

As you recall, I have opposed the City becoming the successor agency for the closed Redevelopment Agency because of the liability incurred by taking this responsibility. The Council as you further recall was not given a decision in open session on whether or not to become the successor agency because a vote was not scheduled in time to meet the state deadline. So now, Long Beach becomes liable for the "enforceable obligations" outlined in the following report. (See first paragraph of the city document that points out this fact.) This is one of the main reasons the Mayor of Los Angeles urged their City Council not to become the successor agency for Los Angeles' Redevelopment. (See this link to read his letter: Additionally, because the city has used redevelopment funds to pay for citywide code enforcement and graffiti removal to the tune of $6 million we must now run the risk of spending this money as the successor agency on these services and having the newly established "Oversight Board" tell us it is an impermissible use of these funds and then the City will have to refund the money and take it out of General Funds. With another announced deficit for next fiscal year for the City of Long Beach, this was not the time to take on additional financial obligations. Redevelopment 001

Save Station 18

Popular Posts