|
A judge has thrown out one allegation by Santa Cruz County in Scotts Valley’s tax-allocation lawsuit against the county.
A judge has thrown out one allegation by Santa Cruz County in Scotts Valley’s tax-allocation lawsuit against the county.
In a summary judgment issued Wednesday, Sept. 24, the county’s claim that the city had agreed never to do anything that would cause “financial detriment” to the county was denied.
The redevelopment agency did agree to the term in its original “pass-through agreement” when it was created, but the city didn’t, San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Marie Weiner ruled.
Other disputed facts will be worked out in a trial, probably in spring 2009.
The city has sued the county for $2.65 million in back taxes, contending that its share of tax revenues was reduced because the city’s redevelopment agency, a separate entity, receives tax revenues.
In response, the county has claimed that the city and the redevelopment agency have violated terms of the pass-through agreement, including building a 17-acre park and planning for affordable housing.
City Attorney Kirsten Powell said Skypark is larger than 17 acres, although the county wants to deduct space for such features as the recreation department building, and the city has an ordinance in place calling for affordable housing in new developments. The county claims the assurance should be in the form of a general plan “overlay.”
“The city is very happy that the first cause of action has been thrown out,” Powell said, “and is confident that the facts will show we did build the park and we have met our obligation to build affordable housing.”
If the city prevails, it would receive $600,000 a year in additional taxes.
 |
Post New Event
Subscribe to this comment's feed