Thousand Oaks RDA/City: "The Lakes" Project*

"The Agency invoked the CRL power of tax increment financing to create a revenue stream from property tax growth, generally thirty years in length for redevelopment projects" City Response: Agree.

"The City utilized the Agency funds for financing redevelopment projects which enhanced the quantity of projects that could be accomplished in a "low" property tax City." City Response: Partially Disagree. The City is a separate legal entity from the ps RDA and has no authority to use RDA funds. The RDA utilized funds for a variety of purposes, one of which was to enhance the quantity of projects in or primarily benefitting the Thousand Oaks Boulevard Redevelopment Project Area.

"The Agency created TOPA#2's 1,279 acres for the stated purpose of eliminating blight and for the revitalization of the downtown core." City Response: Agree.

"City Council and Agency projects were governed by the identical five elected officials." City Council Response: Agree. Sitting members of the City Council also served on the board of the RDA. Ú.

"The original redevelopment plan for these 22 acres known as "Jungleland" increased to 26.8 acres in May, 2012, with the procurement of "blighted" property west of the Civic Arts Plaza." City Response: Disagree. Specific Plan No. 11 is not a redevelopment plan, but a zoning and land use tool to govern development standards and land use designations in the plan area consistent with the City's General Plan. Specific Plan No. 11 was amended on May 22, 2012, to include an additional 2.8 acres on the west side of the Civic Arts Plaza. The original 24 acres and the additional 2.8 acres were already a part of the original 1,279-acre redevelopment project area TOPA#2.

"The Agency used CRL eminent domain authority to procure the original 22-acre property where "The Lakes" project and the Civic Arts/City Hall are located. However, City documents state "No use of eminent domain" was utilized." City Response: Agree with Clarification. The PowerPoint shown at the April 25, 2012, Oversight Board meeting incorrectly included a statement that the former RDA had not used eminent domain. See City response to FA-11.

"The Agency entered into an agreement with the Developer to develop a commercial mixed-use enterprise, "The Lakes" project, with two phases. Only the first phase has been completed." City Response: Agree.

"The Developer has the option to lease "The Lakes" property for up to 99 years, an option to purchase the property at any time and if the Agency desires to sell or otherwise assign its fee interest then it shall first offer to sell or otherwise assign its fee interest to the Developer." City Response: Partially Disagree with Clarification. The lease has a term of 55 years with options to extend four additional 10-year of the lease has a term of 55 years with options to extend four additional 10-year of the lease has a term of 55 years with options to extend

"The Developer has not paid rent due to the negotiated high threshold of return, which has not been met. The Agency received possessory interest -

"The Study outlines many scenarios for short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term solutions to improve economic success of "The Lakes" and, in extension, to the downtown core." City Response: Agree.

"The Agency selected a Developer who had the specific expertise and \, \, \, \gamma \, financial capability to complete the project. The Agency failed to use PPP "best practices" specifications to negotiate the lease." City Response: Disagree. Direct contradiction The DDA process and the selection of the Developer met all the "best practices" keys listed in FA-24.

"The RSA Oversight Board is responsible to determine the disposition of the former Agency assets." City Response: Disagree. Under Health & Safety Code § 34191.5(c)(2)(C), the Oversight Board is only responsible for approving the long-range property management plan prepared by the Successor Agency. Once the long-range property management plan is approved by the Oversight Board and the California Department of Finance, the -

"The total indebtedness for the TOPA#2 for FY 2010-11 was $207,676,694. This remains an obligation of the RDA through the year 2031." City Response: Disagree. The statement that the total indebtedness of $207,674,694 remains an obligation of the RDA through the years 2031 is somewhat misleading. Total indebtedness includes not just outstanding bonds, but legally obligated pass-through payments to various taxing entities. The amount of outstanding bonds is only $ 94,248,243, while the amount obligated to pass-through payments to taxing entities is $113,428,451. This amount decreases each year as principal and interest payments on the current bonds are paid, along with pass-through payments made to each taxing entity. Also, the current debt obligations will be fully paid in FY 2021-2022 (by December 1, 2021), rather than 2031.

"In 2008, the second amendment of the DDA provided for the flexibility in the mix of uses between restaurants and other retail businesses." City Clarification: The original DDA and the 2002 amendment already provided