BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 2170|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 2170
          Author:   Mullin (D)
          Amended:  6/17/14 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE  :  5-2, 6/11/14
          AYES:  Wolk, Beall, DeSaulnier, Hernandez, Liu
          NOES:  Knight, Walters

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  44-26, 4/28/14 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT :    Joint powers authorities:  common powers

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill specifies that the common powers that  
          public agencies may jointly exercise pursuant to a joint powers  
          agreement include the authority to levy a fee, assessment, or a  
          tax.

           ANALYSIS  :    The Joint Exercise of Powers Act allows two or more  
          public agencies to enter an agreement to jointly exercise any  
          power held in common by the parties to the agreement.  Each  
          public agency must independently possess the authority to  
          perform the activity that is to be performed jointly pursuant to  
          a joint powers agreement.   The courts have found that the Act  
          grants no new powers to public agencies, but merely sets up a  
          new procedure for the exercise of existing powers.

          Sometimes an agreement creates a new, separate government called  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 2170
                                                                     Page  
          2

          a joint powers authority (JPA).  Public officials have created  
          more than 700 JPAs, which are confederations of governments  
          working together for common purposes.  A joint powers agreement  
          must state the purpose of the JPA or the power to be exercised,  
          and must provide for the method by which the purpose will be  
          accomplished or the manner in which the power will be exercised.  
           A JPA may exercise only the powers expressly provided for in  
          the agreement.

          This bill specifies that the common powers that public agencies  
          may jointly exercise pursuant to a joint powers agreement  
          include, but are not limited to, the authority to levy a fee,  
          assessment, or a tax.

          This bill enacts a legislative finding and declaration stating  
          that, because a JPA has all powers common to the contracting  
          parties, so long as those powers are specified in the joint  
          powers agreement, the bill's provision do not constitute a  
          change in, but are declaratory of, existing law.

           Comments
           
          Several JPAs in California already impose taxes, fees, or  
          assessments using powers that are held in common by all of the  
          public agencies participating in those JPAs.  However, some  
          local officials are reluctant to use a JPA to levy taxes,  
          assessments, or fees because the Joint Exercise of Powers Act  
          does not explicitly extend that authority to JPAs.  In response  
          to this statutory ambiguity, and the conflicting legal  
          interpretations that it invites, this bill clarifies that JPAs  
          may, consistent with their existing authority under the Joint  
          Exercise of Powers Act; raise revenues through fees or taxes to  
          fund important community projects.  Because a JPA only allows  
          public agencies to exercise their existing powers, this bill  
          does not grant any new revenue powers to local governments.   
          This bill also does not change any of the voter-approval  
          thresholds or other procedural requirements that state law  
          imposes on local, taxes, assessments, and fees. 

           Related legislation
           
          Assembly Bill 418 (Mullin) allows the City/County Association of  
          Governments of San Mateo County, a JPA, to impose a special tax  
          or property-related fee to fund storm water management programs.  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 2170
                                                                     Page  
          3

           

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No   Local:  
           No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  6/17/14)

          California Special Districts Association
          California State Association of Counties
          City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County
          John Stewart Company
          League of California Cities
          Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California
          San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
          SPUR

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  6/17/14)

          California Chamber of Commerce
          California Taxpayers Association
          Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author, "AB 2170  
          simply makes clear that JPAs may, consistent with their existing  
          authority, increase revenue for important community projects  
          subject to all voter approval requirements provided under  
          Proposition 218.

          "AB 2170 provides that the parties to the JPA may exercise any  
          power common to the contracting parties, including, but not  
          limited to, the authority to levy a fee or tax."

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers  
          Association opposes this bill and writes, "AB 2170 would give  
          joint powers authorities (JPA) the authority to levy a fee or  
          tax.  Currently, it is an open legal question whether JPA's have  
          the authority to do this, even if they follow the appropriate  
          constitutional guidelines specified under Propositions 13 & 218.  
           While AB 2170 would clarify this question, we believe it is  
          unnecessary.  Local government entities do not need new revenue  
          generating authority.  They can either approve a special tax  
          with a two-thirds vote, or a Proposition 218 fee or assessment  
          with a majority vote of the affected property owners."  
           

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 2170
                                                                     Page  
          4

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  44-26, 4/28/14
          AYES:  Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta,  
            Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,  
            Chesbro, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Garcia, Gomez,  
            Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hall, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,  
            Lowenthal, Mullin, Nazarian, Pan, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,  
            Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber,  
            Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NOES:  Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Chávez, Conway, Dahle,  
            Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Gatto, Gorell, Grove, Hagman, Harkey,  
            Jones, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Melendez, Muratsuchi,  
            Nestande, Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Salas, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Cooley, Dababneh, Fox, Frazier, Roger  
            Hernández, Mansoor, Medina, Olsen, V. Manuel Pérez, Vacancy


          AB:d  6/18/14   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****
          























                                                                CONTINUED