(California Court of Appeal) - In an action by a City as the successor agency to its former redevelopment agency against the director of the Department of Finance to challenge administrative determinations that invalidated the transfer of funds from the former redevelopment agency--before its dissolution--to the City because this action was pursuant to a 2011 sponsor agreement,and that directed return of a portion of the funds (constituting bond proceeds) to the successor agency and another portion (constituting former tax increment) to the Auditor-Controller of San Joaquin County, the administrator of the trust fund for former tax increment, and to distribute to the taxing entities,the trial court's judgment is: 1) modified where a portion of the payments made to the City reflect goods or services that the City if to the redevelopment project that the successor agency was overseeing; and 2) otherwise affirmed where the decision in City of Bellflower v. Cohen (2016) 245 Cal.
App.4th 438, renders moot any need for a declaration in the present action that the administrative diversion of future local tax revenues violates a provision of our state charter, and Cal. Const.,art. XIII section 24 (b).
Source: findlaw.com