The state government can order redevelopment agencies shuttered, but it cannot force them to redirect funds to cover shortfalls at the state level, the California Supreme Court ruled this afternoon.

The decision has been met with dismay from many local politicians, including Mayor Jerry Sanders (who called it a sad day for the city), mayoral hopefuls Carl DeMaio (“It’s had a devastating blow to our local economy already”), Bonnie Dumanis (“Sacramento politicians should have left well enough alone”), and Nathan Fletcher. Council members Kevin Faulconer, Lorie Zapf and Todd Gloria have also voiced their displeasure.

David Alvarez, however, seems to stand alone for the time being in his optimism. The council member from District 8, which is largely comprised of a section of the city along the Mexican border and detached from the rest of San Diego, has issued a statement largely supportive of the court’s decision.

“Today’s ruling from the California Supreme Court has a significant impact to the City of San Diego, but it is not unexpected. As I have stated previously, reforming the way redevelopment works in San Diego is critical,” begins the release from his office.

“We can develop a policy that more narrowly targets elimination of true blight, creates jobs, and provides affordable housing,” Alvarez continues, appearing to support claims made by redevelopment foes who charge that the agencies serve as slush funds for builders and point to money that’s been poured into Downtown in recent years despite nearby neighborhoods facing much worse infrastructure challenges.