BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE Senator Lois Wolk, Chair BILL NO: AB 229 HEARING: 6/5/13 AUTHOR: J. Pérez FISCAL: Yes VERSION: 4/8/13 TAX LEVY: No CONSULTANT: Lui INFRASTRUCTURE AND REVITALIZATION FINANCING DISTRICTS Authorizes a military base reuse authority to form an infrastructure and revitalization financing district to finance specified projects. Background and Existing Law Cities and counties can create infrastructure financing districts (IFDs) and issue bonds to pay for community scale public works: highways, transit, water systems, sewer projects, flood control, child care facilities, libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities. To repay the bonds, IFDs divert property tax increment revenues from other local governments for 30 years. However, IFDs can't divert property tax increment revenues from schools (SB 308, Seymour, 1990). To form an IFD, the city or county must develop an infrastructure plan, send copies to every landowner, consult with other local governments, and hold a public hearing. Every local agency that will contribute its property tax increment revenue to the IFD must approve the plan. Once the other local officials approve, the city or county must still get the approval of voters in the proposed district, specifically: 2/3-vote to create the district, 2/3-vote to issue bonds, and a majority-vote to set the district's appropriations limit. The deadline for filing lawsuits to challenge an IFD's creation, financing plan, allocation of property tax increment revenues, and tax allocation bonds is 30 days after local officials obtain voter approval. As a result of five Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) processes that followed the end of the Cold War, military bases were closed and realigned. To help local officials convert former military installations into productive AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 2 civilian uses, the Legislature set up the Military Base Reuse Authority Act, which authorized specific powers for the military base reuse and development to enhance the economy and quality of life surrounding the base while protecting the state's environmental resources (AB 3759, Gotch, 1994). The Legislature also created a generic statute to expedite the redevelopment of military bases (AB 2736, Weggeland, 1996). Until 2011, the Community Redevelopment Law allowed local officials to set up redevelopment agencies (RDAs), prepare and adopt redevelopment plans, and finance redevelopment activities. Citing a significant State General Fund deficit, Governor Brown's 2011-12 budget proposed eliminating redevelopment agencies (RDAs) and returning billions of dollars of property tax revenues to schools, cities, and counties to fund core services. Among the statutory changes that the Legislature adopted to implement the 2011-12 budget, AB X1 26 (Blumenfield, 2011) dissolved all RDAs. Public officials continue to search for ways to raise the capital they need to invest in public works projects, like public transit facilities, infill development, or clean water. One concept recognizes that expanded public structures can boost the value of nearby property. Higher property values produce higher property tax revenues. Property tax increment financing captures those property tax increment revenues. With the dissolution of RDAs, local governments and lawmakers seek to adapt IFD's tax increment financing mechanism to reuse and develop former military bases. Proposed Law Assembly Bill 229 creates infrastructure and revitalization financing districts (IRFD), modeled after sections of existing infrastructure financing district law, and authorizes its use for a military base reuse authority. AB 229 makes the following changes to the statutes governing the districts: I. Types of projects . Current law allows IFDs to finance: The purchase, construction, expansion, improvement, seismic retrofit rehabilitation of any real property, AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 3 The planning and design work directly related to the purchase, construction, expansion, or rehabilitation, and Other authorized costs pertaining to replacement dwelling units or action seeking to void the creation of a district. An IFD must finance only public capital facilities of communitywide significance, like highways, transit, water systems, sewer projects, flood control, child care facilities, libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities. An IFD is prohibited from financing routine maintenance, repair work, or the costs of ongoing operation or providing services. AB 229 adds to the list of authorized improvements that an IRFD may finance to include: Brownfields restoration and other environmental mitigation. Purchase of land and property for development purposes and related site improvements. Acquisition, construction, or repair of housing for rental or purchase, including multipurpose facilities. Acquisition, construction, or repair of commercial or industrial structures for private use. The repayment of the transfer of funds to a military base reuse authority pursuant to state law. Existing law requires that any IFD that constructs dwelling units must set aside at least 20% of those units to increase and improve the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing at an affordable housing cost. AB 229 requires that any IRFD that constructs dwelling units must set aside at least 20% of those units to increase and improve the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing at an affordable housing cost, as defined in state law, or at an affordable rent, as defined in state law. AB 229 provides that an IRFD may only finance facilities or services authorized in this bill. The additional facilities or services may not supplant existing facilities or services in the territory when the district was created, except if those facilities or services are nonfunctional, obsolete, hazardous, or in need of upgrading or rehabilitation. AB 229 authorizes the additional facilities or services to supplement those facilities and services as needed to serve new developments. AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 4 Existing law allows an IFD to include areas that are not contiguous. AB 229 authorizes an IRFD to be divided into project areas. The city council, board of supervisors, or joint powers authority that acts as the military base reuse authority may, at any time, add territory to a district or amend the infrastructure financing plan for the district by conducting the same procedures for a district's formation or bond approval. II. Polanco Act . The Polanco Redevelopment Act encourages cleanup and development of brownfields-properties contaminated by hazardous waste. The Act authorized former redevelopment agencies to conduct a cleanup and to recover the costs of that cleanup from responsible parties. AB 229 authorizes an IRFD to utilize any powers under the Polanco Act and finance any action necessary to implement the Act. AB 229 adds "infrastructure and revitalization financing district" into the Polanco's Act definition of a local agency. III. Sustainable Communities Strategy . The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protect Act requires the Air Resources Board to set regional targets for automobiles' and light trucks' greenhouse gas emission reduction, requires a regional transportation plan to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy to meet targets for greenhouse gas emission reduction, requires the California Transportation Commission to maintain guidelines for travel demand models, requires cities and counties to revise their housing elements every eight years in conjunction with the regional transportation plan, and relaxes CEQA requirements for housing developments that are consistent with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SB 375, Steinberg, 2008). AB 229 allows IRFDs to finance any project that implements a sustainable communities strategy prepared pursuant to state law. IV. Military bases . AB 229 authorizes cities and counties to finance a project on a former military base, only if the project is consistent with the authority reuse plan and is approved by the military base reuse authority, if applicable. V. Redevelopment . Existing law prohibits an IFD from including any portion of a redevelopment project area. AB AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 5 229 repeals that statutory prohibition and authorizes an IRFD to finance any project or portion of a project that is located in, or overlaps with, any redevelopment project area, former redevelopment project area, or former military base. AB 229 requires that any debt or obligation of an IRFD must be subordinate to an enforceable obligation of a former redevelopment agency, pursuant to state law. VI. Housing . Current IFD law provides that if any dwelling units are proposed to be removed or destroyed, the legislative body must: Within four years of the removal or destruction, require the construction or rehabilitation, for rental or sale to persons or families of low or moderate income, of an equal number of replacement dwelling units at affordable housing cost. Within four years of the removal or destruction, require the construction or rehabilitation, for rental or sale to persons of low or moderate income, a number of dwelling units which is at least one unit but not less than 20 percent of the total dwelling units removed at affordable housing cost. Provide relocation assistance and make all the payments required to displaced persons. Ensure that removal or destruction of any dwelling units occupied by persons or families of low or moderate income not take place unless and until there are suitable housing units, at comparable cost to the units. AB 229 adds that an equal number of replacement dwelling units may also be rented at affordable rent, as defined in state law. Current law states the Legislature's intent that an IFD's territory should be substantially undeveloped. AB 229 is silent on this intent and adds that an IRFD's establishment should not ordinarily lead to the removal of existing functional, habitable, and safe dwelling units. AB 229 requires that if dwelling units located on a former military base are destroyed or removed in connection with a base reuse plan, replacement dwelling units, as required in current law, may be located anywhere within the territory of the former military base consistent with the base reuse plan, local general plan, and infrastructure financing AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 6 plan, as applicable. VII. Net available revenue . Current law creates the Redevelopment Property Tax Fund, which receives property taxes that formerly would have been allocated to a redevelopment agency. Money deposited in the fund is used to help a successor agency wind down its affairs. Any excess funds are allocated to local governments as property taxes. AB 229 defines "net available revenue" (NAR) as periodic distributions to the city from the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund, pursuant to state law, available to the city after all preexisting legal commitments and obligations from that revenue are made, pursuant to state law. It must only include revenue remaining after all current distributions, including payment of enforceable obligations, all distributions to other taxing entities, an applicable administrate fees, have been made. The bill authorizes the city's legislative body to dedicate any NAR through the financing plan. AB 229 requires the plan to include a specification of the maximum portion of the NAR proposed to be committed to the district for each year the district will receive revenues, if applicable. The NAR portion may vary over time. VIII. Resolution of intention . To begin the process for establishing an IFD, current law requires the legislative body of a city to adopt a resolution of intention, which must include: a) a statement that the IFD is proposed to be established, with a description of the boundaries; b) a statement of the type of public facilities proposed to be financed; c) a statement that the tax increment revenue from affected taxing entities may be used; and d) a time and place for a public hearing on the proposal. AB 229 adds, to the resolution of intention, a required statement that the city's NAR may be used to finance facilities and the maximum portion of NAR to be committed to the district each year during which the district will receive revenues. IX. Term life . Current law limits the terms of IFDs' bonds to no more than 30 years. AB 229 sets the maximum term of an IRFD's bond to 40 years from the date on which AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 7 the ordinance forming the district is adopted, or a later date, if specified by the ordinance, on which the allocation of tax increment will begin. AB 229 provides that the IRFD may issue debt with a final maturity date of up to 30 years from the date of issuance of each debt issue, subject to the time limit on tax allocation to the district. X. Fire district approval . Before an IFD can divert property tax increment from another taxing entity, current law requires every local agency that will contribute its property tax increment revenue to the IFD must approve the infrastructure financing plan. Some special districts are governed ex officio by county boards of supervisors or city councils. In the case of a special district that provides fire protection services and where the county board of supervisors is the governing authority, AB 229 requires the special district to act on an IRFD's plan by adopting a separate resolution. XI. Reporting . Current IFD law is silent on reporting measures. AB 229 requires that no later than June 30 each year after the adoption of an IRFD's financing plan, the legislative body must post on its website an annual report, which must contain all of the following: A summary of the district's expenditures. A description of the progress made toward the district's adopted goals. A status assessment regarding the completion of the IRFD's projects. XII. Bond sale . Current law allows IFD bonds to be sold at discount not to exceed 5% of par at public sale. Bonds may be sold at no less than par to the federal government at private sale without any public advertisement. At least five days prior to the sale, a notice must be published in a general circulation newspaper and financial newspaper published in the Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles. AB 229 authorizes bonds to be sold at discount not to exceed five percent of par at negotiated sale. AB 229 limits any negotiated bond sale for an IRFD's bond issuances from exceeding $5 million. XIII. Definitions . AB 229 defines the following terms: "City" means a city, county, city and county, or AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 8 joint powers authority, where that entity acts as the military base reuse authority established pursuant to state law. "District" means an IRFD. The bill provides than an IRFD is a "district" within the meaning of the California Constitution Article XIIA, Section 1. "Infrastructure and revitalization financing district" means a legally constituted governmental entity established for the sole purpose of financing facilities authorized by the bill. The "legislative body" is the city council, board of supervisors, or joint powers authority that is acting as the military base reuse authority. "Project area" means a defined area in a district in which the district's activities share a common purpose or goal and an overall financing plan. "Public works" means public facilities, as described in the bill, which are to be financed in whole or in part by the district. XIV. Findings and declarations . AB 229 makes finding to support the bill's purpose. State Revenue Impact No estimate. Comments 1. Purpose of the bill . Developing real property on a decommissioned military base poses substantial challenges. Revitalizing former base property that may contain outdated structures, inadequate infrastructure, and toxic contamination requires a sophisticated developer with sufficient resources to make substantial capital investments. According to the author, "Base closure can also present opportunities for business relocation, economic development, and land reuse that cannot be addressed by either the state's government taxing agencies or private investment alone. Unlike cities and counties, military base reuse authorities don't have the financing tools to respond to infrastructure and economic development requirements." In response, AB 229 authorizes a military base reuse authority to form an IRFD, similar to the authorization for cities and counties to create an IFD. The bill also broadens the types of project a military base AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 9 reuse IRFD may finance, including the purchase of property for economic development and the repayment of start-up financing provided by local governments. 2. Bond sales . "Competitive sale" and "negotiated sale" are two principal methods by which a bond issuer selects an underwriter to purchase its bonds and resell them to investors. In a competitive sale, underwriters deliver sealed bids to the bond issuer. The underwriter with the lowest bid is awarded the sale of the bonds. The appropriate method for selling bonds depends on specific details of each individual debt issuance, but competitive sales of GO bonds usually cost less than negotiated sales. AB 229 allows negotiated sales, a significant change from how IFDs may currently sell bonds. While negotiated bond sales provide an opportunity to pre-market bonds that potential investors may not be familiar with, competitive sales provide the certainty of lower interest rates. Because a reuse authority needs more certainty, the Committee may wish to consider amending AB 229 to delete the authorization for negotiated sales. 3. Timing . Albert Einstein once said, "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." In 2011, when Governor Brown proposed to eliminate redevelopment, the world of IFDs and redevelopment intertwined. In response, Legislators turned to IFDs as a possible alternative financing mechanism last session. The Governor vetoed most of the measures, noting that "expanding the scope of infrastructure financing districts is premature and [could] cause cities to focus their efforts on using the new tools provided by the measure instead of winding down redevelopment." Those timing concerns may still remain, as successor agencies continue to wind down redevelopment. 4. Technical amendments . AB 229 amends the same provision in the Polanco Act as AB 243 (Dickinson), which adds "IRFD" to the definition of a "local agency." To clarify that an IRFD formed under either AB 229 or AB 243 is authorized to carry out powers under the Polanco Act, the Committee may wish to consider amending the bill to include the following language: On page 21, line 33, after "district" insert: AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 10 created pursuant to Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 53369) to Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code or Chapter 2.10 (commencing with Section 53399) to Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. 5. Related bills . AB 229 is not the only bill seeking to update the IFD financing mechanism or that addresses military base reuse. SB 33 (Wolk) waives the voter-approval requirements to create an IFD, extends an IFD's life term, requires annual, independent audits, and authorizes an IFD's use for projects in disadvantaged communities, hazardous cleanup, environmental mitigation, and flood protection. It is set to be heard on June 12 in the Assembly Local Government Committee. SB 339 (Cannella) authorizes a county, by a 4/5-vote of the board of supervisors, to sell, or enter into a lease, concession, or managerial contract involving county property acquired from the closure of a military base. It is at the Assembly Desk. SB 628 (Beall) removes the 2/3-vote requirement to form an IFD, the 2/3-vote requirement to issue bonds, and the majority vote to set the appropriations limit, if an IFD proposes to implement a transit priority project (TPP), regional transportation plan, or any other project consistent with a sustainable communities strategy or alternative planning strategy. It is at the Assembly Desk. AB 121 (Dickinson) authorizes Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, by 4/5-vote of the board, to sell, or to enter into a lease, concession, or managerial contract for property from the closure of Mather and McClellan Air Force Bases. It is on the Senate Floor. AB 243 (Dickinson) creates Infrastructure and Revitalization Financing Districts (IRFD) and reduces the 2/3-voter thresholds to 55% to form an IRFD and issue bonds. It is set to be heard on June 12 in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. AB 662 (Atkins) allows infrastructure financing districts to include portions of former redevelopment project areas and modifies the statutes governing redevelopment agencies' dissolution. It will be heard on June 5 in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. AB 229 -- 4/8/13 -- Page 11 AB 690 (Campos) establishes a Jobs and Infrastructure Financing Districts (JIDs) in every city and authorizes the issuance of revenue bonds to finance specified projects. The bill eliminates existing IFD law's replacement housing provisions. It also requires a job creation plan that ensures that for every $1 million invested, 10 prevailing wage jobs are created. It is in the Assembly Local Government Committee. Assembly Actions Assembly Local Government:8-1 Assembly Appropriations: 16-1 Assembly Floor: 71-3 Support and Opposition (5/30/13) Support : California Special Districts Association; Cities of Alameda, Concord, Coronado, Oakland, Salinas, West Sacramento; City and County of San Francisco; Construction Employers' Association; League of California Cities; East Bay Housing Organizations; Fort Ord Reuse Authority; Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California. Opposition : California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights; California Taxpayers Association.