BILL ANALYSIS
SB 53
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 1, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
SB 53 (DeSaulnier) - As Introduced: January 14, 2009
Policy Committee:
JudiciaryVote:10-0 (Consent)
Urgency: Yes State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes the Attorney General (AG) to negotiate
amendments to the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) that would
not materially adversely alter, limit, or impair the rights to
receive tobacco assets or in any way materially impair the
rights and remedies of bondholders or the security for their
bonds.
FISCAL EFFECT
Negligible fiscal impact.
COMMENTS
1)Background . In November 1998, the attorneys general of 46
states (including California) entered into the MSA, a
structured settlement agreement, with various tobacco
manufacturers for the payment of moneys to the Settling
States. In August 1998, California entered into a memorandum
of understanding (MOU) with various local governments in the
state to coordinate pending cases and to allocate certain
portions of the recovery under the MSA. SB 1831
(Peace)/Chapter 414 of 2002, authorized the state to sell its
right to receive future payments under the MSA in order to
provide one-time General Fund revenue. Specifically, the
legislation authorized the issuance of bonds, pledging the
tobacco assets as security. The authorizing legislation
prohibits the state from amending the MSA or MOU in any way
that would impact MSA payments. Any MSA amendment that would
change how participating manufacturers' payments are
calculated or the amount of such payments to the Settling
SB 53
Page 2
States cannot become effective unless all MSA Settling States
agree to the amendment.
2)Purpose . This bill, sponsored by the AG, is intended to give
the AG the flexibility to agree to amendments to the MSA or
MOU if such amendments do not materially adversely affect the
right to receive tobacco assets or materially impair
bondholders' rights and remedies. According to the AG, among
states that have securitized all or part of their future MSA
payments, only California is required to promise the
bondholders that the state will not agree to amend the MSA in
any way that would alter the rights to receive MSA payments
pledged as security for the bonds.
3)Urgency Clause . The reasons for this measure including an
urgency provision are:
a) One amendment is ready for approval, but it cannot go
into effect until California agrees.
b) Other amendments are in negotiations, and if resolved,
would require California's approval.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081