Document elcerrito_gov_doc_b8cd75e251

AGENDA BILL Agenda Item No. 7(0) Date: August 21, 2012 To: City Council of the City of El Cerrito acting as Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency From: Subject: Lori Trevino, Economic Development Manager Review and authorization to submit draft Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule III (January-June 2013) ACTION REQUESTED Adopt Successor Agency resolution reviewing and authorizing submittal,;,of, the draft Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule III covering the period January through_ June 2013. BACKGROUND ABx1 26 ("Dissolution Act") dissolved the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency ("RDA") and established the Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") on February 1, 2012. At that time, the County Auditor-Controller established a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund and the Successor Agency established a Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund ("RORF"). Under the Dissolution Act, the portion of property tax revenues collected from the City of El Cerrito Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") that was considered Tax Increment prior to the RDA's dissolution are deposited into the The A-C distributes the funds in the to the Successor Agency to retire the former RDA's obligations and to taxing entities that were affected by the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area. Pursuant to the Dissolution Act, the Successor Agency must review and authorize submittal of a Recognized Obligation Schedule ("ROPS") for each six-month period, starting in January 2012. Each ROPS must then be approved by the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency ("Oversight Board") and the California Department of Finance ("DOF") before funding is disbursed from the by the A-C for payments on the approved ROPS. CHANGES TO THE ROPS PROCESS Assembly Bill 1484 ("Trailer Bill") was recently enacted by the State, which made numerous changes to the Dissolution Act related to the consideration of enforceable obligations and ROPS. ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. ROPS Consideration Timeline The Trailer Bill changed the timeline for consideration of the ROPS, starting with ROPS III for January-June 2013. The Successor Agency must submit ROPS III approved by the Oversight Board to DOF no later than September 4, 2012 (delayed from September 1 as required in the legislation due to the Labor Day holiday). DOF then has 5 business days to request review of the ROPS before it becomes effective. If the DOF requests review, then it has 45 days to review the ROPS and approve or disapprove of any items. The Successor Agency can request additional review by DOF and an opportunity to meet and confer on disputed items, and must make that request within 5 business days of receiving a DOF determination. The DOF is required to notify the Successor Agency and A-C of its further review at least 15 days prior to the date of distributions from the For ROPS III, the notification date is December 18, 2012 for the January 3, 2013 disbursement. ROPS Review The Trailer Bill requires DOF to determine whether items on the ROPS are, enforceable obligations, and the amounts and the funding source of the obligations. It authorizes DOF to eliminate or modify any item on a ROPS prior to providing approval. The Successor Agency may request additional review. The Successor Agency may approve amendments to a ROPS to reflect the resolution of a dispute between the DOF and the Successor Agency, but any changes approved by the Successor Agency will not affect a prior allocation from the or create a liability for taxing entities with respect to a prior allocation. The Trailer Bill authorizes the A-C to review a ROPS and object to any items that are not demonstrated to be enforceable obligations and/or the funding source proposed for any items. This review can occur before or after Oversight Board action on a ROPS. The A-C can object by submitting notice to DOF, the Successor Agency, and the Oversight Board 60 days prior to the applicable distribution date. Penalties Failing to submit a ROPS by the deadlines in the Trailer Bill may subject the City to $10,000 per day penalty for each day the ROPS is delinquent. Failure to submit a ROPS within 10 days of a deadline may result in a twenty-five percent reduction in the administrative cost allowance for that ROPS period. ROPS Ill DOF has provided a new form for ROPS III, which includes a summary of funds available and total obligations for the period, an itemized listing of obligations, and a reconciliation of the First ROPS. The proposed ROPS III is Exhibit A to the attached resolution, reviewing and authorizing its submittal. Obligations included are as follows: • Tax Allocation Bond Debt Service. Funds are due to the bond trustee by June 27, 2013 for payment on July 1, 2013. Page 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. • ERAF and SERAF Loans. No payment due during the ROPS period. Note that while the Trailer Bill clarified the enforceability of SERAF and ERAF loans, it also delayed their repayment until2013-14. • Accrued Vacation Liability. This· item is being added to the ROPS, as it was not identified prior to preparation of previous ROPS. • Valente Promissory Note. Payment is due March 5, 2013. • Ohlone Gardens Loan Obligation. This obligation is under dispute with DOF as to its funding source and any unpaid amounts are due during the ROPS period. • Eden Housing Loan Obligation. This obligation is under dispute with DOF as to its funding source and any unpaid amounts are due during the ROPS period. • Cooperation Agreement with the El Cerrito Municipal Services Corporation. A payment is due during the ROPS, but remains under dispute by DOF( , • Administrative Allowance for FY 2012-13. Unpaid on ROPS II due to insufficient funds in the amount is listed for payment on ROPS III. • Administrative Allowance for FY 2011-12. Unpaid on ROPS I due to insufficient funds in the amount is listed for payment on a future ROPS. Given the amount of debt service due during the ROPS period and the unpaid portion of pass through payments for FY 2011-12 that will be withheld by the A-C from the next distribution, there are insufficient funds for all obligations due during the ROPS period. The Dissolution Act does not require the A-Cto notify the Successor Agency of the anticipated distribution for ROPS III until October 1, 2012, so staff was unable to complete the summary of funds available on the ROPS form. Items on ROPS I and ROPS II that were approved but were unpaid, or remain in dispute are listed for funding on a future ROPS, once there are sufficient funds and/or disputes are resolved. Once authorized, the ROPS III will be considered by the Oversight Board at a special meeting on Monday, August 27, 2012. Anticipating that DOF may modify its ROPS III form, the Successor Agency Resolution includes a provision authorizing staff to amend the form administratively to account for such changes by DOF that occur after the Successor Agency's consideration. OTHER TRAILER BILL ELEMENTS There are numerous other elements of the Trailer Bill, which are summarized below, along with a discussion of the impact on El Cerrito. Enforceable Obligations In recognition of the timing issues in the Dissolution Act, the Trailer Bill granted the Successor Agency the authority to amend the Enforceable Obligation Payment Schedule ("EOPS") that had been adopted by the RDA prior to dissolution to ensure that enforceable obligations were met until a ROPS could be approved by the Oversight Page3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. Board and the DOF. It deleted the prohibition on making payments after May 1, 2012 without those approvals and certification by the A-C. The Trailer Bill clarified that enforceable obligations include: • Contracts for administration or operation of the Successor Agency • SERAF and ERAF loans from the LMIHF • New loans from the City (with Oversight Board approval) for administrative costs, enforceable obligations and project-related expenses. Pass-Through Payments The Trailer Bill requires the A-C to make payments to the taxing entities for FY 2011-12 pass-through payments that were not previously paid by reducing the amount paid to the Successor Agency for enforceable obligations from the subject to subordination to bond debt. In El Cerrito's case, the A-C paid a portion of the payments from the distribution for the Second ROPS and subordinated a portion. Future distributions from the to the Successor Agency will be reduced until the subordinated amount is paid in full. · Other sections of the Trailer Bill make significant changes to the Dissolution Act as it relates to the calculation and payment of pass-through payments to taxing entities by the A-C. The stated legislative intent is that the full amount of pass-through payments be made from the without reduction to account sufficient funds for enforceable obligations. Questions remain about the constitutionality of these pass-through payment amounts. True Up Payment The Trailer Bill contains procedures for distributing any residual amounts of funds in the that would have been available if the Dissolution Act had gone into effect when originally intended and not modified by the Supreme Court. The intent appears to be to retroactively undo the Supreme Court stay and attempt expeditiously to collect funds from Successor Agencies. Pursuant to this provision of the Trailer Bill, the A-C demanded $1.75 million ("True Up Payment") from the Successor Agency on July 9, 2012 to be paid by July 12, 2012. Failure to remit the payment would result in penalties against the Successor Agency and the City, with Distributions to be withheld by the A-C and Sale and Use Tax revenue to be withheld from the City by the Board of Equalization The Successor Agency filed a lawsuit on July 13, 2012 against the A-C, DOF, and BOE disputing the True Up Payment, penalties, and withholding of revenues. Review Procedures The Trailer Bill deletes the requirement that the First ROPS be certified by the A-C before it can take effect, but rather states it takes effect once approved by the Oversight Board and the DOF. The certification was to follow the completion of an agreed-upon procedures audit ("AUP") by the A-C. The AUP will still be completed, but the deadline is moved to October 1, 2012. Page4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. Additionally, the Successor Agency is required to hire a licensed accountant, to be approved by the A-C, to review the dissolution of the RDA and establishment of the Successor Agency, including disposition of real property and use of RDA funds. The process includes simultaneous consideration of the Review by the Oversight Board, the County administrative officer, the A-C; and the DOF. Review of the LMIHF is to be completed by October 1, 2012 and all other RDA funds by December 15, 2012. The intent of the review is to determine if any funds or assets should be returned to the A -C for distribution to taxing entities. There are similar penalties for noncompliance as with the True Up Payment. Should the Successor Agency comply with any required return of funds and assets, the result of the review is to be a Finding of Completion by the DOF that would allow the Successor Agency to retain RDA assets for redevelopment purposes. It is staffs understanding the Government Accounting and Audit Committee (GAAC) has advised CPA accounting firms not to engage this review as it doesn't follow professional accounting standards, but are working with DOF and the State. Controller's Office (SCO) on procedures that will meet accounting standards. Procedures are not expected to be available until the end of August, making completion of the H6using portion of the review by October 1 challenging. Of particular concern are provisions of the Trailer Bill that appear to exclude from the definition of enforceable obligations certain items that were considered enforceable under the Dissolution Act, thereby retroactively disallowing payments made by the RDA prior to dissolution, even though such payments were valid at the time they were made. Affordable Housing and Housing Successor The Trailer Bill significantly modifies and clarifies treatment of affordable housing assets and obligations under the Dissolution Act. In particular, the definition of a Housing Asset is clarified to include real property purchased for affordable housing, encumbered funds, receivables, and amounts that were owed to the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund ("LMIHF") from the RDA for funds borrowed to pay the Supplemental Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund ("SERAF") in prior years. It provides a process for the Oversight Board to review and determine (subject to DOF review) the disposition of mixed-use assets. It also proscribes a process for DOF review of the transfer of Housing Assets from the RDA to the City as Housing Successor to be completed by September 1, 2012, and requires the establishment by the Housing Successor of a Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund. The establishment of this fund and DOF's review of the transfer of Housing Assets from the RDA to the Housing Successor are underway and staff will provide updates to the City Council of the results of that review in October. There remain numerous unresolved issues related to affordable housing, including the role of Housing Successors, funding of their administrative costs, and continuation of redevelopment housing production requirements. These issues will require additional clean-up legislation. PageS ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. Successor Agency Legal Status The Trailer Bill attempts to clarify the legal status of the Successor Agency, but there remains some ambiguity. It states that the Successor Agency and the City are separate legal entities, but does not address the relationship between them. Specific clarifications include: • The City is not responsible for the former RDA's liabilities, as they automatically transferred to the Successor Agency upon RDA dissolution. • The Successor Agency can only participate in redevelopment activities to the extent it is completing work on enforceable obligations. • The Successor Agency is subject to the Brown Act. • The City may not reverse its election to serve as the Successor Agency. • The Successor Agency is able to file for bankruptcy as a local public entity. • Creditors of the Successor Agency, DOF and affected taxing entities have standing to file suit to compel a Successor Agency to adopt a ROPS or face penalties. · • The Successor Agency is required to cause an annual audit of its fin.~ncial transactions and records. • The Successor Agency is required to dispose of all assets and terminate its existence within one year of its final debt payment. Successor Agency Activities The Successor Agency is authorized to: • Hold reserves when the next allocation from the will be insufficient to pay bond debt obligations; • Create enforceable obligations as needed to conduct its wind-down activities, such as hiring staff, consultants or legal counsel, or procuring insurance; • Enter into contracts to comply with enforceable obligations that existed prior to June 28, 2011; • Enter into a contract (with Oversight Board approval) with the City to fund shortfalls for Successor Agency administrative costs, enforceable obligations, or project-related expenses; • List on its ROPS certain costs separate from its administrative cost allowance. Oversight Board The Trailer Bill made modifications to the Dissolution Act related to the Oversight Board. Those of significance include: • No conflict of interest exists when Oversight Board members employed by the City vote to approve a contract as an enforceable obligation. • The Oversight Board can direct the Successor Agency to provide legal or financial advice independent of Successor Agency Staff and is authorized to contract with the county or a private agency for administrative support. • The Oversight Board may reduce the Successor Agency's administrative cost allowance below the previous statutory minimum of$250,000. • On matters within its purview, the Oversight Board may supersede decisions of the Successor Agency or staff. Page6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. • Oversight Board members have the same immunities applicable to public entities and public employees when exercising its authorities under the Dissolution Act. • The DOF may request review of an Oversight Board action within 5 days of receipt of notice of the action and then have 40 calendar days to approve or return the action for reconsideration. For actions related to real property and housing assets, DOF may extend the review period to 60 calendar days. (Note a different review period applies to DOF review of a ROPS.) LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Review and authorization ofROPS III is consistent with the Dissolution Act and Trailer Bill. Scott anin City Manager Attachments: . 1. Successor Agency Resolution 2012-:XX, reviewing and authorizing submittal of the draft Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for January-June 2013 Page7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 7(D) Attachment 1 SUCCESSOR AGENCY RESOLUTION 2012-XX RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNINHG BOARD OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE EL CERRITO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE DRAFT RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE III FOR JANUARY THROUGH JUNE 2013, AS REQUIRED UNDER THE DISSOLUTION ACT WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (the "Redevelopment Law"), the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of El Cerrito (the "City") adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the City of El Cerrito Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No. 77-17, as amended by Ordinances No. 80-13; No. 89-5; No. 94-4; No. 2004-3; No. 2005-01; and No. 2006-10 (collectively, the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency (the "RDA") was' for implementation of the Redevelopment Plan; and · f WHEREAS, as part of the 2011-12 State budget bill, ABx1 26 (the "Dissolution Act") was enacted significantly modifying the Redevelopment Law to require the dissolution of redevelopment agencies throughout California and the establishment successor agencies to wind down the former redevelopment agencies' affairs; and WHEREAS, on August 15, 2011, pursuant to the Dissolution Act, the City elected to serve as the Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency (the "Successor Agency"), should it be dissolved; and WHEREAS, California redevelopment agencies were dissolved on February 1, 2012; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Dissolution Act, upon dissolution, the RDA transferred as a matter of law all remaining liabilities, debts and obligations to the Successor Agency; and transferred all unencumbered funds and assets to the Successor Agency's Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund (the "RORF"), for disposition and/or use by the Successor Agency to retire RDA debt and pay for RDA obligations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Dissolution Act, the Contra Costa County Auditor Controller (the "Auditor-Controller") established the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (the to hold Redevelopment Property Tax collected from the City of El Cerrito Redevelopment Project Area to be disbursed to the Successor Agency for payment of its enforceable obligations and to taxing entities affected by the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Dissolution Act, the Successor Agency timely submitted Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules ("ROPS") for Periods I and II covering the period January through June 2012 and July through December 2012, respectively, which had been approved by the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency (the "Oversight Board"), to the California Department of Finance (the "DOF"); and paid DOF-approved ROPS items to the degree funds were available in the RORF or disbursed by the Auditor-Controller from the and ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 7(D) Attachment 1 WHEREAS, AB 1484 (the "Trailer Bill") was enacted on July 1, 2012 modifying the Dissolution Act to require the Successor Agency to submit an Oversight Board-approved ROPS III covering the period January through June 2013, to the DOF by September 1, 2012 (delayed administratively to September 4, 2012 due to the Labor Day holiday); and WHEREAS, the Trailer Bill requires the Successor Agency to submit the ROPS III on a form provided by DOF, which was made available on August 1, 2012, but modified on August 13,2012;and WHEREAS, the City Council, acting in its role as Successor Agency, has reviewed the draft ROPS III that was prepared pursuant to the Dissolution Act, which is Exhibit .A to this Resolution, for submittal to the Oversight Board of the Successor Agency, the· Auditor- Controller, and DOF; and WHEREAS, the Successor Agency wishes to authorize Successor Agency staff tof.amend the ROPS III administratively to account for any additional changes made by DOF to the ROPS form that occur after the Successor Agency's consideration. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito acting as Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency hereby finds the above recitals to be true and accurate. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito acting as Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency authorizes the submittal of the draft Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule III as required under the Dissolution Act, subject to such changes as may be necessary to accommodate changes in the DOF approved form, any such changes to be approved by the City Manager. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. I CERTIFY that at the regular meeting on August 21, 2012, the City Council of the City of El Cerrito as Successor Agency to the El Cerrito Redevelopment Agency passed this resolution by the following vote: A YES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ---PAGE BREAK--- Agenda Item No. 7(D) Attachment 1 IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City ofEl Cerrito on August_, 2012. Cheryl Morse, City Clerk APPROVED: William C. Jones III, Mayor ---PAGE BREAK--- SUMMARY OF RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE Filed for the January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013 Period See Attached Page of Explanatory Notes for Lines B, C E and G Name of Successor Agency: e:rcJriit~' Outstanding Debt or Obligation Current Period Outstanding Debt or Obligation A Available Revenues Other Than Anticipated Funding 8 Anticipated Enforceable Obligations Funded with c Anticipated Administrative Allowance Funded with D Total Requested (B + C Total Current Period Outstanding Debt or Obligation (A + B + C = E) Should be the same amount as ROPS fonn six-month total E Enter Total Six-Month Anticipated Funding (Obtain from county auditor-controller) F Variance (E - D = F) Maximum Allowable should not exceed Total Anticipated Funding Prior Period (January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012) Estimated vs. Actual Payments(as required in HSC section 34186 G Enter Estimated Obligations Funded by (Should be the lesser of Finance's approved amount including admin allowance or the actual amount distributed) H Enter Actual Obligations Paid with I Enter Actual Administrative Expenses Paid with J Adjustment to Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund (G - (H + I) = J) K Adjusted (The total requested shall be adjusted if actual obligations paid with are less than the estimated obligation amount.) - - - Certification of Oversight Board Chairman: Pursuant to Section 34177(m) of the Health and Safety code, I hereby certify that the above is a true and accurate Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the above named agency. Name Signature Agenda Item No. 7(0) Exhibit A Total Outstanding Debt or Obligation i.'i $ . 1;!5;500,435 Six-Month Total . ..,~2~Rgg> ! • . 2;929,899 $ 2;929,899 . (2,92$,899) - $ 2,929,899 Title Date ---PAGE BREAK--- NameofSuccessorAgency: Councy: ~C~o-ntr~a~C~os~ta Oversight Board Approval Date: _ Contract/ Contract/ Agreement Agreement Project Name I Debt Execution Termination Item# Obligation Date Date Payee GrandTotal ic ( 1 1 1 Tax Allocation Bonds 1997 A 12/17/1997 7/1/2019 Union Bank 2 Tax Allocation Bonds 1998 B 12/17/1997 7/1/2015 Union Bank 3 Tax Allocation Bonds 2004 A 10/21/2004 7/1/2023 Union Bank 4 Tax Allocation Bonds 2004 B Non-Hsg 10/21/2004 7/1/2012 Union Bank 5 Tax Allocation Bonds 2004 B Hsg 10/21/2004 7/1/2023 Union Bank City L&M 6 2009-1 0 SERAF Loan 2/16/2010 NA Housing Fund 7 2005-06 ERAF Loan 4/17/2006 NA City L&M Housing Fund City of El 8 Accrued Vacation Liability NA NA Cerrito George 9 Valente Promissory Note 3/5/2009 3/5/2024 Valente 10 Ohlone Gardens Loan 6/24/2009 NA Ohlone Agreement Gardens LP Eden Housing Loan 11 Agreement 5/17/2011 NA Eden Housing El Cerrito 12 Cooperation Agreement 3/7/2011 11/24/2024 MSC 13 FY 2012-13 Administrative Statutory NA City of El Allowance Cerrito FY 2011-12 Administrative ROPSI City of El 14 Allowance Unpaid NA Cerrito RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS Ill) January 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013 See Attached Page of Explanatory Notes Total Outstanding Total Due Debtor During Description/ Project Obligation as Fiscal Year Bond Prolect Scope Area of 6/30/12 2012-13 LMIHF Proceeds , i ,I 135,500;435 6,416,147 Refunding of prior City of El TAB for Redev 4,191,180 1,040,930 Pro is Cerrito Refunding of prior City ofEI TAB for L&M Hsg 875,840 427,764 Projs Cerrito Tax-exempt TAB City ofEI for Infrastructure 13,645,964 1,184,341 Projs Cerrito Taxable TAB for City ofEI Redev Projs Cerrito 481,045 481,045 Taxable TAB for City ofEI 5,389,513 406,308 L&M Hsg Projs Cerrito Funds advanced City ofEI forSERAF Cerrito 995,741 - payment Funds advanced City of El 251,577 for ERAF payment Cerrito - Accrued Vacation City ofEI Liability of RDA- Cerrito 19,392 19,392 funded employees Loan for land City of El acquistion Cerrito 3,170,371 288,215 Undisbursed loan City of El 471,152 471,152 commitment Cerrito Undisbursed loan City of El commitment Cerrito 310,000 310,000 Implementation of City ofEI City of El Cerrito Cerrito 105,198,660 1,287,000 Redevelopment Administrative Allowance per City ofEI 250,000 250,000 AB1x26 Cerrito Administrative City of El Allowance per Cerrito 250,000 250,000 AB1x26 Funding Source Reserve Admin Balance Allowance - 1 ' 2,929,899 . : 487,125 211,013 758,114 - 134,888 - - 19,392 288,215 471,152 310,000 - 250,000 - Six-Month Other Total I - 2,929,899 487,125 ' 211,013 ' :•75~.11.4 ' : I - : i 134;888 I. ' ' I• 19,39~ : ' ,2813,215 471,152 310,000 - I I 250,000 I I - ---PAGE BREAK--- Name of Successor Agency: El Cerrito County: Contra Costa Project Name I Debt Description/ Project PaQe/Form Line ObliQation Pavee Scope GrandiTotal , . ' iu~ ROPS 1 1 Tax Allocation Bonds 1997 Union Bank Refunding of prior TAB A for Redev Projs 2 Tax Allocation Bonds Refunding of prior ROPS 1 Union Bank TAB for L&M Hsg 1998 B Projs ROPS 1 3 Tax Allocation Bonds Union Bank Tax-exempt TAB for 2004A Infrastructure Projs ROPS 1 4 Tax Allocation Bonds Union Bank Taxable TAB for 2004 B Non-Hsg RedevProjs ROPS 1 5 Tax Allocation Bonds Union Bank Taxable TAB for L&M 2004 B Hsg Hsg Projs Loan for land ROPS 1 6 Valente Promissory George Valente Note acquistion ROPS 1 7 Cooperation Agreement El Cerrito MSC lmpl. of City of El Cerrito Redev. Plan ROPS 1 9 2009-10 SERAF Loan City L&M Housing Funds advanced for Fund SERAF payment ROPS 1 10 2005-06 ERAF Loan City L&M Housing Funds advanced for Fund ERAF payment ROPS 1 11 Ohlone Gardens Loan Chione Gardens LP Undisbursed loan Agreement commitment Eden Housing Loan Undisbursed loan ROPS1 12 Agreement Eden Housing commitment FY 2011-12 Administrative ROPS 1 13 Administrative City of El Cerrito Allowance per Allowance AB1x26 Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 34186 PRIOR PERIOD ESTIMATED OBLIGATIONS vs. ACTUAL PAYMENTS RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS I) January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 See Attached Page of Explanatory Notes LMIHF Bond Proceeds Reserve Balance Project Area Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual . ' $'781',152 $ . . $ $ - $ ·'29;704 City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito CityofEI Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI 29,704 Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito City ofEI 471,152 0 Cerrito City ofEI Cerrito 310,000 0 City ofEI Cerrito I Admin Allowance Other Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual , , $ 953,989 $ $ : - $ 674;284 I 288,216 0 $ 258,511 I I 331,914 0 331,914' I 83,859 0 83,8591 ! I I I 0 250,000 0 I ---PAGE BREAK--- Name of Successor Agency: County: Item# B/C E G 8 10 11 12 13 14 6 9 10 11 12 13 RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS Ill)- NOTES January 1, 2013 through June 30, 2013 Notes/Comments SUMMARY PAGE The Successor Agency's Administrative Allowance of $250,000 is to be funded from and is listed in the column of the itemized ROPS. Therefore the allowance is included in Line B, not Line C. Also see note for ROPS Ill Line 13 below. County Auditor Controller is unable to provide an estimate of anticipated Funding prior to September 4, 2012. Finance's approved amount was $953,988 for ROPS I, but no was distributed to the Successor Agency for ROPS I. ROPS I was funded with the portion of the Tax Increment received by the Redevelopment Agency in December, 2011 that was placed in the Successor Agency's Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund ("RORF") on February 1, 2012. ROPSIII Amounts in the Total Outstanding Obligation column are as of 6/30/2012 and therefore include payments made on ROPS II during FY 2012-13. The only source offunds for ROPS Ill will be distributed to the Successor Agency from the County Auditor-Controller. This item is being added to ROPS Ill, as it was not identified prior to preparation of ROPS I and ROPS II. DOF approved this item on ROPS I, but changed the funding source from to LMIHF, which Successor is disputing, as there are no funds in the LMIHF, and no funds from the LMIHF were deposited into the RORF. This Item is being retained on this ROPS to be paid from pending resolution of the dispute over the funding source. See correspondence dated July 9, 2012 and July 12, 2012, and Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Injunction, El Cerrito Successor Agency v Robert Campbell et al. DOF approved this item on ROPS I, but changed the funding source from to LMIHF, which Successor is disputing, as there are no funds in the LMIHF, and no funds from the LMIHF were deposited into the RORF. This Item is being retained on this ROPS to be paid from pending resolution of the dispute over the funding source. See correspondence dated July 9, 2012 and July 12, 2012, and Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Injunction, El Cerrito Successor Agency v Robert Campbell et al. The Successor Agency is disputing DOF's disapproval of this item on ROPS I and ROPS II. See correspondence from legal counsel Sky Woodruff, Meyers Nave dated 6/1/2012. This item is being retained on this ROPS to be paid from pending resolution of the dispute. As the funding source of the Successor Agency's Admnistrative Allowance is the obligation is listed in the column rather than the Administrative Allowance column, which appears redundant in this case. Administrative costs are being borne by the City of El Cerrito and will be reimbursed by the Successor Agency from deposits from the to the RORF, rather than charging those costs directly to the RORF. Although DOF approved this item on ROPS I, there were insufficient funds distributed from the for ROPS I. Therefore the Item is being retained on the ROPS for future funding from PRIOR PERIOD PAYMENTS Funding in the Successor Agency's RORF for ROPS I included only two sources: FY2011-12 Tax Increment received by the Redevelopment Agency in December 2011 (uses listed in the Other column) and a small residual of prior years' tax increment and interest (uses listed in the Reserve Balance column.) The Successor Agency listed and the DOF approved this item on ROPS I for funding with However, RORF funds used for the payment originated as Reserve Balance and FY2011-12 Tax Increment (listed as "Other''). The Successor Agency listed and the DOF approved this item on ROPS I for funding with However, RORF funds used for the payment originated as FY2011-12 Tax Increment (listed as "Other''). The Successor Agency listed and the DOF approved this item on ROPS I for funding with However, RORF funds used for the payment-=originated as FY2011-12 Tax Increment (listed as "Other''). The Successor Agency listed this item on ROPS I for funding with DOF approved the item for funding with LMIHF. However, there were no funds in the LMIHF. This Item is being retained on ROPS Ill to be paid from pending resolution of the dispute. The Successor Agency listed this item on ROPS I for funding with DOF approved the item for funding with LMIHF. However, there were no funds in the LMIHF. This Item is being retained on ROPS Ill to be paid from pending resolution of the dispute. The Successor Agency listed and the DOF approved this item on ROPS I for funding with However, there were insufficient funds to pay this ite and it is being retained on ROPS Ill to be paid from