BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1462|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1462
Author: Senate Governance and Finance Committee
Amended: 6/10/14
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 7-0, 4/24/14
AYES: Wolk, Knight, Beall, DeSaulnier, Hernandez, Liu, Walters
SENATE FLOOR : 35-0, 5/1/14 (Consent)
AYES: Anderson, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De
León, DeSaulnier, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Hancock,
Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Knight, Lara, Leno, Lieu, Liu,
Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nielsen, Padilla, Pavley, Roth,
Steinberg, Torres, Vidak, Walters, Wolk, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Beall, Calderon, Jackson, Wright, Yee
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 6/26/14 (Consent) - See last page for
vote
SUBJECT : Local government: omnibus bill
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill, the Local Government Omnibus Act of 2014,
proposes a number of minor, noncontroversial changes to state
laws governing local governments' powers and duties.
Assembly Amendments add 12 more noncontroversial changes.
ANALYSIS : Each year, local officials discover problems with
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
2
the state statutes that affect counties, cities, special
districts, and redevelopment agencies, as well as the laws on
land use planning and development. These minor problems do not
warrant separate (and expensive) bills. According to the
Legislative Analyst, in 2001-02 the cost of producing a bill was
$17,890.
Legislators respond by combining several of these minor topics
into an annual "omnibus bill." In 2013, for example, the local
government omnibus bill was SB 184 (Senate Governance and
Finance Committee, Chapter 210) which contained 12
noncontroversial statutory changes, avoiding about $200,000 in
legislative costs. Although this practice may violate a strict
interpretation of the single-subject and germaneness rules as
presented in Californians for an Open Primary v. McPherson
(2006), it is an expeditious and relatively inexpensive way to
respond to multiple requests.
This bill, the Local Government Omnibus Act of 2014, proposes
the following changes to the state laws affecting local
agencies' powers and duties:
1.County law libraries' real property management . The
Legislature established a system of county law libraries more
than 120 years ago. Each county law library has an appointed
Board of Trustees, which supervises its operations and
finances. Existing law allows a county law library's Board of
Trustees to sell real property, with the proceeds going to the
law library fund. The Council of California County Law
Librarians wants the Legislature to give law library trustees
more flexibility in managing libraries' real property. This
bill allows a board of trustees to lease, rent, or license
real property, with proceeds going to the law library fund.
2.Sacramento County fictitious business names . Existing law
requires a fictitious business name statement to be filed with
the clerk of the county in which a registrant has his/her
principal place of business in this state or, if a registrant
has no place of business in this state, with the Clerk of
Sacramento County. As a result of various reorganizations of
Sacramento County's departments, the County's fictitious
business name functions are now administered by the County's
Department of Finance, pursuant to a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with the County Clerk/Recorder's Office.
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
3
Sacramento County officials want to eliminate this confusing
and unnecessary MOU process and establish the County's
statutory authority to administer fictitious business name
functions through its Finance Department. This bill allows
the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors to designate, by
resolution, another County officer to perform the duties of
the County Clerk pursuant to specified state laws governing
fictitious business names.
3.Local bond issuers determination of taxable bond maturity .
Most municipal bonds are tax-exempt, but the Legislature has
allowed state and local governments to issue taxable revenue
bonds. To provide state and local governments with the
flexibility to access the market for taxable bonds, state law
allows government bond issuers to determine the denominations,
forms, redemption terms, and interest rates of taxable bonds.
Existing law allows a legislative body to determine the "time
or times" at which taxable bonds are payable. Bond finance
practitioners believe that this language could be interpreted
narrowly to refer only to how the principal and/or interest of
the bonds is to be paid (annually, semiannually, monthly,
etc.). This bill clarifies that local bond issuers may also
determine the final maturity date or dates of the bonds.
4.State Controller's property tax audits cross-reference .
Existing law requires the State Controller to perform periodic
audits of counties' allocation of property tax revenue among
local jurisdictions. The statutory language requiring these
audits was originally placed in the Revenue and Taxation Code,
but was later moved into the Government Code. The State
Controller's Office notes that when the language was moved out
of the Revenue and Taxation Code, a cross-reference to the
chapter of the Revenue and Taxation Code governing property
tax allocation was not updated. To clarify the current
statute, this bill corrects the cross-reference to the Revenue
and Taxation Code sections that govern property tax
allocation.
5.Infrastructure Financing Districts (IFDs) . Cities and
counties can create IFDs and issue bonds to pay for community
scale public works such as 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 the
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
4
city or county that created the district and any other
consenting local governments - but not schools - for 30 years.
When they were enacted, the statutes governing IFDs only used
the term "city" because the IFD statutes defined "city" as
including a county and a city and county. To avoid any
misperceptions that IFD law does not apply to counties, the
Local Government Omnibus Act of 2013, SB 184 (Senate
Governance and Finance Committee, Chapter 210, Statutes of
2013) removed counties from the definition of a city and
inserted the term "county" throughout the statutes that govern
IFDs. The California State Association of Counties notes that
last year's bill omitted a reference to a county clerk in one
IFD statute. This bill corrects this omission by adding a
reference to a clerk of a county.
6.Special districts and securitized limited obligation notes
(SLONs) . Special districts can issue SLONs and borrow up to
$2 million to be paid back from designated revenues, over 10
years. Unlike riskier promissory notes, SLONs are more secure
because the special district pledges a dedicated stream of
revenues. SLONs are like promissory notes in that they don't
require voter approval. It takes a 4/5 vote of a special
district's governing board to issue SLONs. The statutory
authority to issue SLONs sunsets on December 31, 2014. To
keep this financing tool available to special districts, the
California Special Districts Association wants legislators to
extend the sunset date in the statutes authorizing SLONs.
This bill extends the authority for special districts to issue
SLONs from December 31, 2014, to December 31, 2019.
7.Office of Noise Control . Existing law directs local agencies
to adopt a general plan with seven specified elements,
including a noise element. The noise element must recognize
guidelines established by the California Office of Noise
Control. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
must adopt and periodically revise guidelines for the
preparation and content of local general plans. OPR staff
notes that the Office of Noise Control, which last issued
noise control guidelines in 1976, was eliminated sometime in
the 1980s. This bill deletes the requirement that a general
plan's noise element must recognize guidelines issued by the
Office of Noise Control, thereby clarifying OPR's authority to
develop guidelines for the noise element.
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
5
8.Port or harbor infrastructure definition cross-reference .
Existing law allows any two or more harbor agencies to use the
joint powers law to establish a port infrastructure financing
authority to establish an infrastructure fund and finance port
or harbor infrastructure. Existing law defining "port of
harbor infrastructure" contains an erroneous cross-reference.
This bill corrects that error.
9.California Assessors' Association . The California Assessors'
Association, the statewide non-profit professional association
for County Assessors, was previously known as the State
Association of County Assessors. The Association notes that
two statutes still refer to the Association's outdated name.
This bill replaces the outdated name, "State Association of
County Assessors," with the correct name, "California
Assessors' Association."
10.Property and Business Improvement Districts (PBID) . The PBID
Law of 1994 allows property owners to petition a city (or
county) to set up a PBID and levy assessments on property
owners, business owners, or both, to pay for promotional
activities as well as for physical improvements.
Practitioners who work with PBIDs have identified errors and
ambiguities in the PBID Law. They want the Legislature to
amend the PBID Law to make the following corrections and
clarifications:
A. Assessment definition . The PBID Law of 1994 defines the
term "assessment" as a levy for the purpose of acquiring,
constructing, installing, or maintaining improvements and
promoting activities which will benefit the properties or
businesses located within a property and business
improvement district. This bill replaces the reference to
"promoting" activities with the phrase "providing"
activities;
B. District boundaries . Existing law requires that a
PBID's management district plan and the resolution
establishing a PBID must include a description of the
district's boundaries. This bill allows this boundary
description to be made by reference to a map that is on
file with the City Clerk;
C. Cross-reference correction . Existing law requires that
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
6
the resolution establishing a PBID must contain specified
information. This bill corrects an inaccurate
cross-reference to the statute specifying the information
the resolution establishing a PBID must contain;
D. District renewal . Existing law specifies that if a PBID
expires due to statutory time limits, a new management
district plan may be created and a new district established
pursuant to specified procedures. This bill clarifies that
a district is "renewed," and not "established," by the
specified process. The bill also clarifies that a district
may be renewed before its statutory time limit expires;
E. Interest and penalties . Existing law requires that all
delinquent payments for PBIDs' assessments must be charged
interest and penalties. This bill allows, rather than
requires, delinquent assessment payments to be charged
interest and penalties;
F. Public hearing . Existing law requires PBID officials to
hold a "public hearing" on proposed modifications to a
management district plan. This bill replaces related
references to a "public meeting" with the phrase "public
hearing;" and
G. Use of estimates in the annual report . Existing law
requires PBID officials to produce an annual report on the
PBID's activities. The report must include specified
information, including the amount of any surplus or deficit
revenues to be carried over from a previous fiscal year,
and the amount of any contributions to be made from sources
other than assessments. This bill allows the annual report
to include the "estimated" amount of surplus or deficit
revenues carried over from a previous year, and the
"estimated" amount of contributions from sources other than
PBID assessments.
Comments
This bill compiles noncontroversial changes to state laws
affecting local agencies and land use into a single bill.
Sending a bill through the legislative process costs around
$18,000. By avoiding separate bills, this bill avoids more than
$160,000 in legislative costs. Although the practice may
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
7
violate a strict interpretation of the single-subject and
germaneness rules, the Senate Governance and Finance Committee
(Committee) insists on a very public review of each item. More
than 100 public officials, trade groups, lobbyists, and
legislative staffers see each proposal before it goes into the
Committee's bill. Should any item attract opposition, the
Committee will delete it. In this transparent process, there is
no hidden agenda. If it's not consensus, it's not omnibus.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/27/14)
California Assessors' Association
California Public Securities Association
California Special Districts Association
Council of California County Law Librarians
County of Sacramento
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 6/26/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Lowenthal, Maienschein,
Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, John A. Pérez, V.
Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Ridley-Thomas,
Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Gorell, Logue, Rendon, Vacancy
AB:e 6/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
SB 1462
Page
8
CONTINUED