pages: CityCouncil/2010-01-05.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-01-05 | 11 | Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Tax Increment (TI) financing has to be spent in redevelopment areas; and whether Alameda Point is the City's largest redevelopment area. The Interim City Manager responded redevelopment agencies are formed to cure blight; stated the initiative determines how TI dollars will be used, which is usually negotiated in the DDA; there are other ways to use TI; the 80% stream could be leveraged for a tax allocation bond; the proceeds of the tax allocation bonds could be used for a variety of things within the project area; 20% of the TI can be used inside and outside of project areas as long as it is spent on affordable housing. Councilmember Gilmore stated the TDM is not spelled out in the initiative; inquired whether there is anything preventing the City from requiring further TDM; stated that she is not clear whether or not the TDM is part of the public benefits cap. The Public Works Director responded staff has concluded that the TDM is included in the public benefit cap based in the general definition of on site and off site traffic and transit improvements; stated the concern is that staff does not know what is needed to really mitigate traffic impacts; the TDM hits up against the $200 million cap and the 2% tax cap for operation and maintenance; staff is concerned that the [$200 million] cap might be exceeded when all public benefits are considered; the project also has to cover maintenance in order to meet the Council resolution requiring fiscal neutrality. Mr. Keliher stated SunCal's opinion is that it [TDM] is not included in the cap; the project has to pay for it [TDM]; it [TDM] is part of the business plan and a number of different things; TDM is outlined in Section 5.6 of the Specific Plan; there are not a lot of details because that is what CEQA is for; a complete environmental review will be done; Council approved starting the CEQA documents several months ago; SunCal gave $1/4 million towards the effort. Councilmember Gilmore stated various mitigations will be discussed at the end of the CEQA process; inquired whether said mitigations are part of the $200 million cap, to which Mr. Keliher responded in the negative. The Public Works Director stated the public benefit lists on site and off site traffic and transit improvements; that he does not understand how TDM is not included in on site and off site traffic and transit improvements. The Interim City Manager stated Mr. Keliher's definition of what is referenced in the Specific Plan is correct; the Public Works Director is also correct; there is an inconsistency; there is language in the initiative that specifically says the TDM will be assessed on the property; therefore, the TDM had to be included in the 2% cap. Mr. Keliher stated there are going to be a lot of little gray areas and interpretations that have to be addressed in the DDA: the contingency is 45%: 25% for design level and Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 11 Board of Education January 5, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-01-05.pdf |