opment by Dan Carrigg
In recent months, gubernatorial candidates and legislators have been discussing the need to bring back redevelopment, which some have called “redevelopment 2.0.” These conversations are positive for the future of California cities, given the importance of this former tool in revitalizing urban cores, supporting economic development and building affordable housing. Yet several new tax-increment tools have already been created, further complicating the policy discussion. Should new tools be added to the existing ones or is this about reviving old redevelopment law? The new tax-increment tools lack the concentrated financial impact provided by the former redevelopment tool. Left
unaddressed, this financing gap presents major challenges for the future use of these tools. The State of California should also be concerned, because weak local financing options will diminish many policies that it seeks to advance. The state is investing billions of dollars to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled, increase transit usage, improve water infrastructure, build affordable housing and assist disadvantaged communities. The location of future development is critical to the success of these policies. Without sufficient local financing resources, however, many local projects will fail to maximize opportunities.
To prepare for the coming policy discussions, it’s helpful for cities to: • Revisit the benefits and challenges of the former redevelopment tool and how its elimination affected cities; • Summarize the League’s work since 2012 in shaping new tax-increment tools; • Compare prior redevelopment financing with new tools; • Review current state policy priorities to identify common ground; and • Outline what would be most helpful for cities going forward. continued
Dan Carrigg is deputy executive director and legislative director for the League and can be reached at dcarrigg@cacities.org.
www.westerncity.com
Western City, May 2018
11