[Editor’s Note: Mr. O’Leary is the Mayor of Culver City and former chair of the embattled Redevelopment Agency.]
I am pleased to report that I have just received the following information:
The State Supreme Court has agreed to hear the redevelopment petition filed last month on an expedited basis. The court also has issued a partial stay that prevents Redevelopment Agencies from having to make payments to Sacramento until the court resolves the case. Here is the full story:
The California Supreme Court announced that it has agreed to take California Redevelopment Assn. v. Matosantos (S194861), the petition challenging the constitutionality of the recent budget bills (AB 1x 26 & 27) that eliminate redevelopment agencies unless they agree to make a “ransom” payment to fund state obligations.
The Supreme Court also granted part of the stay requested by the California Redevelopment Assn. and League of California Cities. The stay, in effect, prevents redevelopment agencies from being forced to make the payments until the court rules on the merits of the case.
“We’re very gratified that the California Supreme Court has agreed to take our case, issued the stay we requested to preserve the status quo, and that it is moving forward on an expedited basis,” said Chris McKenzie, executive director of the League of California Cities. “The redevelopment bills are unconstitutional, violating Prop. 22 and other provisions of the state constitution. We look forward to presenting our case to the court very soon. We’re confident the State Supreme Court will ultimately strike down this unconstitutional legislation that ignores the voters’ will and that will destroy local economies.”
The court established an expedited briefing schedule designed to facilitate oral arguments as early as possible in 2011, and a decision before Jan. 15, the date when redevelopment agencies are required to make their first payment.
