Modification: City of Montclair v. Cohen

CITY OF MONTCLAIR,

as Successor Agency, etc., et al.,

Plaintiffs and Respondents,

v.

MICHAEL COHEN, as Director, etc.

Defendant and Appellant.

No. C080430

(Super. Ct. No. 34-2014-80001948-CU-WM-GDS)

CITY OF SANTA ROSA, as Successor Agency, etc., et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v.

MICHAEL COHEN, as Director, etc., et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

No. C081817

(Super. Ct. No. 34-2015-80002051-CU-WM-GDS)

California Courts of Appeal

Third Appellate District

(Sacramento)

Filed March 1, 2018

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 6, 2018, be modified as follows:

On page 4, the last two sentences of the partial paragraph that read, "Thus, tax increment financing was a boon to these redevelopment agencies, but it was a fiscal disaster for schools, special districts, and other taxing entities equally dependent on property tax revenue. (Matosantos, supra, at p. 248.) For them, property tax revenue was frozen," are modified to read as follows:

Thus, tax increment financing was a boon to redevelopment agencies. They reaped the benefits of escalating real estate valuations while property tax revenues to entities other than redevelopment agencies were stagnant. In the brutal competition among local entities for property tax revenues, a competition fueled by Proposition 13's constriction of property tax rates, schools, special districts, and other taxing entities were at a disadvantage. (Matosantos, supra, at p. 248.)

There is no change in the judgment.

BY THE COURT:

RAYE , P. J.

MAURO, J.

HOCH, J.