Home
Clerk
>
Successor Agency to Redevelopment Agency
>
Resolutions
>
SA R- 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/11/2012 4:15:12 PM
Creation date
1/30/2012 12:00:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Department
City Clerk
General - Type
Ordinances
General 2 - Date
1/24/2012
Number
2
Description
Successor Agency of RDA City to sub as plaintiff ongoing action Riverside v. Bank of America
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE <br />3900 MAIN STREET <br />RNERSID2, CA 97522 <br />(951) 825 -5557 <br />RESOLUTION NO.2 <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA, AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE <br />REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, <br />AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE TO SUBSTITUTE AS <br />PLAINTIFF FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IN AN ONGOING <br />ACTION ENTITLED CITY OF RIVERSIDE ET AL. V. BAND OF <br />AMERICA N.A. ET AL. <br />WHEREAS, on November 12, 2009, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Riverside, <br />together with the City of Riverside and the Public Finance Authority of the City of Riverside filed an <br />action entitled City of Riverside et al. v. Bank of America, N.A. et al., United States District Court, <br />Central District of California, Eastern Division, Case No. CV 09 -08284 SJD; to seek the recovery of <br />damages incurred as a result of alleged violations of the Sherman Act, 15 USC 31, and the <br />Cartwright Act, California Business and Professions Code § 16720, et seq. This case has since been <br />consolidated with other similar cases in the United States District Court for the Southern District of <br />New York, as Master Docket No. 08 -02516 (VM); and <br />WHEREAS, the state legislature recently enacted Assembly Bill 1X 26, the Redevelopment <br />Agency Dissolution Act ( "AB 1X 26 "), intended to stabilize school funding by reducing or <br />eliminating the diversion of property tax revenues from school districts to the state's community <br />redevelopment agencies; and <br />WHEREAS, AB 1X 26, recently upheld by the state Supreme Court in California <br />Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos, bars redevelopment agencies from engaging in new <br />business and provides for their winding down and dissolution; and <br />WHEREAS, AB 1X 26 provides for successor agencies to both enforce the rights of <br />redevelopment agencies, and to wind down their affairs (Health and Saf. Code § 34177.); and <br />WHEREAS, on March 15, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22184, <br />authorizing the City of Riverside to become a successor agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the <br />City of Riverside pursuant to legislation then proposed as the Redevelopment Agency Dissolution <br />and Succession Act; and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.