Vacaville poised to lose $3.8M in reserves

By From page A5 | April 12, 2014

VACAVILLE — The city’s general fund is poised to take a major hit as Vacaville prepares to return $3.8 million to its former redevelopment agency.

Staff presentations during a previous City Council meeting indicate that the action will shrink the city’s 2014-15 estimated general fund reserve from approximately 20 percent down to below 15 percent, which will fall below the council’s mandated threshold.

The city was put on verbal notice by the state that the multimillion-dollar transaction between the city and its former redevelopment agency needed to be reversed. The city is waiting for a written letter confirming the needed action, said City Manager Laura Kuhn.

Kuhn said it stems back to 2011, the year prior to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies across the state. Cities during that time moved forward with transactions to protect their interests. The city in a previous year had loaned its redevelopment agency $3.8 million to buy the Nut Tree property. The agency paid back the loan during that “clawback” year.

The state says the city has to give that money back to the redevelopment agency, Kuhn said.

“I’m hoping we can negotiate some terms of payment that will be more comfortable to the city,” she said, as opposed to a lump-sum return.

When the state eliminated redevelopment agencies, it required that redevelopment dollars be divided among local agencies, including local schools and special districts.

How much or when the city could get that money back is up in the air. The city will be put in line with other redevelopment obligations.

Reach Susan Winlow at 427-6955 or [email protected] Follow her on Twitter at www.twitter.com/swinlowdr.


Discussion | 9 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • Tax PayerApril 12, 2014 - 4:59 am

    wow we go from 20% to 15% reserve due to Redevelopment money in the coffers. City workers have they pay reduced 8.82% during this time. We are being hurt by Redevelopment money being returned to the state. Why doesn't this city reduce some services so that all in the city feel the pain? I can think of one: Fire Paramedic program is in the red each year $2-3 million dollars. We have the "Cadillac" plan where our fire personnel man the paramedic trucks at an average rate of $115,000 in pay each year plus benefits plus PERS retirement. All other cities have an outside paramedic service that actually gives the cities money back each year. The city workers are not responsible for this but are paying for it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Tax Payer has an agendaApril 12, 2014 - 11:32 pm

    ...this comment brought to you by Medic Ambulance. Greedily looking to take over Vacaville, since 1979.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Tax Payer/ Concerned residentApril 13, 2014 - 5:42 am

    Incorrect, just a concerned tax payer wondering why the powerful fire union has the council and mayor in it's pocket. That can be the only reason this has gone on for so long.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterApril 12, 2014 - 8:08 am

    The Mayor and the City Council (who were also the Redevelopment Board) and the City staff really screwed over the people of Vacaville and the working City employees. How the Mayor or any of these incumbents could ever run again for public service is beyond me. They sold out the City so they would have nice projects around town to tout when they ran for re-election (or to help their development buddies). Well, they've certainly got a legacy now. Just shameful... absolutely shameful. I'm sure you could pick the next 5 people on the street to lead Vacaville and they would do a much better job than these professional politicians. Just shameful.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rick WoodApril 12, 2014 - 12:46 pm

    It was worth a try. Why can't a city get its loans to another agency paid back!?! Certainly there were abuses of state redevelopment law by cities, but the meat-axe change imposed by the state is scandalous and irresponsible. A low point for the state and especially the Democrats who championed the law while controlling the wheels of state government.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • A Massive Hippy Hippy Shakedown from all sides of the issue?April 12, 2014 - 2:23 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • I am telling you now... You can not give away the Goddies without paying for them, someone always pays a priceApril 12, 2014 - 2:31 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 12, 2014 - 3:11 pm

    Rick, you are exactly right. The state threw the baby out with the bath water. Brown was attempting to balance the state's budget on the backs of municipalities. It could very well amount to less tax revenue to the state long term. Meanwhile, quality of life deteriorates in cities and counties. It was interesting that Brown championed the death of redevelopment when he was a major proponent while mayor of Oakland.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • MATTY T BAND BLUE JEAN BLUESApril 12, 2014 - 6:51 pm


    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.