BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:   April 6, 2016


                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT


                           Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair


          AB 2514  
          (Brown) - As Introduced February 19, 2016


          SUBJECT:  Local government:  redevelopment:  successor agencies  
          to redevelopment agencies:  enforceable obligations.


          SUMMARY:  Allows federal base reuse obligations for the former  
          Norton Air Force Base as confirmed by the 1990 Joint Powers  
          Agreement providing for member contributions, and by the 1990  
          cooperation agreement with a state water contractor, to be  
          deemed enforceable obligations, for purposes of the law related  
          to redevelopment dissolution.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Creates infrastructure and revitalization financing districts,  
            authorizes a military base reuse authority to form a district,  
            and allows these districts to finance a broader range of  
            projects and facilities to clean-up and develop former  
            military bases.


          2)Allows local agencies to establish an Enhanced Infrastructure  
            Financing District which provides broad authorities for local  
            agencies to use tax increment to finance a wide variety of  
            projects including infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  2





            wastewater and groundwater facilities; affordable housing,  
            mixed-use development and sustainable development;  
            transit-oriented development; light rail; industrial  
            structures; parks and open space; libraries; child care  
            facilities; military base reuse; and brownfields remediation. 


          3)Authorizes local governments to create a Community  
            Revitalization and Investment Authority to use tax increment  
            revenue to improve infrastructure, assist businesses, and  
            support affordable housing in disadvantaged communities and  
            allows a plan within an area that is within a former military  
            base that is principally characterized by deteriorated or  
            inadequate infrastructure and structures. 


          4)Allows, pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, two or  
            more public agencies by agreement, to jointly exercise any  
            power common to the contracting parties, as specified, 


          if authorized by their legislative or other governing bodies.
          5)Allows the legislative bodies for communities having territory  
            within, adjacent to or in proximity to a military facility or  
            installation, as specified, to create a separate joint powers  
            agency (JPA) to have and exclusively exercise powers of an  
            agency in furtherance of the redevelopment of a project area  
            approved by the JPA and makes a number of findings and  
            declarations, including:


             a)   The closure of two or more military facilities or  
               installations within the County of San Bernardino will  
               cause serious economic hardship in that county, including  
               loss of jobs, increased unemployment, deterioration of  
               properties and land utilization and undue disruption of the  
               lives and activities of the people; and,










                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  3





             b)   It is the policy of the Legislature to assist  
               communities within the County of San Bernardino in their  
               attempt to preserve the military facilities and  
               installations for their continued use as airports and  
               aviation-related purposes.


          6)Dissolves Redevelopment Agencies (RDAs) and establishes a  
            process for winding down their activities.

          7)Defines "enforceable obligations" and requires successor  
            agencies to make payments due to enforceable obligations, as  
            specified.

          8)Requires successor agencies to prepare a Recognized Obligation  
            Payment Schedule (ROPS), before each six-month fiscal period,  
            in accordance with specified requirements, and requires the  
            schedule to identify one or more of the following sources of  
            payment:

             a)   Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund;

             b)   Bond proceeds;

             c)   Reserve balances;

             d)   Administrative cost allowance;

             e)   The RDA Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF), as specified;  
               and,

             f)   Other revenue sources, including rents, concessions,  
               asset sale proceeds, interest earnings, and any other  
               revenues derived from the former redevelopment agency, as  
               approved by the oversight board.

          9)Requires each successor agency to have an oversight board of  
            seven members to approve certain actions of the successor  
            agency and requires the Department of Finance (DOF) to review  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  4





            the actions of an oversight board.

          FISCAL EFFECT:  This bill is keyed fiscal.  


          COMMENTS:  


          1)Bill Summary. This bill allows federal base reuse obligations  
            for the former Norton Air Force Base as confirmed by the 1990  
            Joint Powers Agreement providing for member contributions, and  
            by the 1990 cooperation agreement with a state water  
            contractor, to be deemed enforceable obligations, for purposes  
            of the law related to redevelopment dissolution.


            This bill is sponsored by the Inland Valley Development Agency  
            (IVDA).


          2)Author's Statement.  According to the author, "As a result of  
            limitations created by the redevelopment dissolution law, the  
            Department of Finance has been unable to confirm that the  
            pledge of tax revenues under a JPA contract is an enforceable  
            obligation to the IVDA. Each member of the JPA pledged a  
            portion of its tax rate to satisfy the requirements of the  
            Department of Defense to enter into a federally-approved  
            military base reuse agreement.  IVDA had state RDA authority  
            and its formation and funding is unique.  IVDA is the only  
            military base reuse entity in California organized as a JPA.   
            IVDA has complied with RDA dissolution requirements and today  
            the Agency includes the on-going base reuse JPA and a  
            Successor Agency.  However, the RDA dissolution statutes  
            caused a disruption in the local funding agreements pursuant  
            to the federal contracts executed when the JPA was formed 26  
            years ago.  Since 2012, IVDA has lost $24 million in revenues  
            pledged to the JPA, limiting base reuse initiatives.  That  
            revenue is being redistributed to other agencies."









                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  5






          3)Background on IVDA.  IVDA is a joint powers authority (JPA)  
            comprised of the Cities of San Bernardino, Colton, and Loma  
            Linda, and the County of San Bernardino.  In 1989, 


          AB 419 (Eaves), Chapter 545, Statutes of 1989, added a new  
            section to the Health and Safety Code to specifically  
            authorize the legislative bodies of these local agencies to  
            form a JPA for purposes of redevelopment of Norton Air Force  
            Base and George Air Force Base, thus granting IVDA the powers  
            to act as a redevelopment agency.  AB 419 contained a number  
            of findings, including the need for a JPA to assist  
            communities within the County of San Bernardino in their  
            attempt to preserve the military facilities and installations  
            because of their closure and the serious economic hardship and  
            accompanying blight that would follow.  
            Thus, pursuant to the enabling legislation (AB 419) and the  
            Joint Exercise of Powers Act, IVDA was formed in 1990 with the  
            authority and power to plan for the use and reuse of the  
            Norton AFB, to acquire, maintain and operate an airport for  
            the economic benefit of the East Valley, and to serve as a  
            federal base re-use authority.  IVDA is specifically  
            designated by the United States Department of Defense as the  
            officially recognized Local Redevelopment Authority under 32  
            CFR Part 175, Section 175.3 and under Public Law 100-526 (also  
            known as the Base Realignment and Closure Act).  


            Agreements and Tax Increment Contributions. As part of the  
            joint powers agreement in 1990, the local agency members  
            agreed to provisions requiring tax contributions from each  
            member agency to fund IVDA.  The agreement required "Tax  
            Increment Revenues attributable to the project area shall be  
            allocated for Agency use from each Member's percentage share  
            of the one percent (1%) tax rate as follows:  (i) each member  
            which is an incorporated city shall have allocated for Agency  
            use one-half (1/2) of their percentage share of the one  
            percent (1%) tax rate for property taxes generated upon the  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  6





            incremental assessed value of property located within their  
            municipal boundaries of the project area; (ii) the County  
            shall have allocated for Agency use one-half (1/2) of the  
            County General Fund share of the one percent (1%) tax rate for  
            property taxes generated upon the incremental assessed value  
            of property which is within the County unincorporated areas of  
            the project area."


            There was also an agreement in 1990 between IVDA and the San  
            Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD) to  
            "cooperatively provide for the redevelopment 


            of certain areas within the territorial limits of the Agency."  
             The agreement specifies that SBVMWD would continue to receive  
            tax revenues resulting from increases in the District debt  
            services tax levies and the two percent (2%) annual escalation  
            in assessed values, and  that IVDA would receive all other tax  
            increment revenues attributable to the District had the  
            redevelopment plan not been adopted, and would remit 50% to  
            the District. 
            2012 Binding Settlement.  On February 27, 2014, the IVDA  
            entered into a binding settlement agreement with the State of  
            California, DOF and others to resolve prior litigation matters  
            regarding the IVDA's unique formation and operation under  
            federal and state law. That settlement ensured that going  
            forward, IVDA had a Successor Agency function that served to  
            address the post-dissolution functions related to IVDA's  
            exercise of California redevelopment powers.  It further  
            established that IVDA's existence and operation as a military  
            base reuse JPA was not dissolved and continues to function for  
            the purposes for which it was originally established. The  
            Successor Agency and the Joint Powers Authority are separate  
            and distinct legal entities. 

          4)Post-Dissolution.  DOF, in a letter dated December 17, 2014,  
            to IVDA, denied Base Reuse Joint Powers Authority Obligations  
            in the amount of $3.9 million, noting that "it is our  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  7





            understanding that this item relates to the revenue  
            contribution to be made by members of the IVDA JPA for the  
            continued operation of IVDA JPA?Finance initially denied this  
            item because it does not fall within the meaning of an  
            enforceable obligation as defined by HSC Section 34171 (d)(1).  
             During the Meet and Confer process, the Agency contends that  
            this item is the IVDA JPA's revenues that should be passed  
            through the Agency for payment to the IVDA JPA.  However the  
            Agency has not provided any documents to show that an  
            enforceable obligation, pursuant [to] HSC section 34171  
            (d)(1), exists that requires the payment of these revenues to  
            the IVDA JPA to be listed on the ROPS.  Therefore, this item  
            is not eligible for RPTTF funding."


            In another letter from DOF to IVDA dated November 16, 2015,  
            pass-through agreements totaling $3.9 million were not allowed  
            with DOF stating that "The Agency was unable to provide  
            sufficient documentation to support the amounts claimed, and  
            pursuant to HSC section 34183 (a)(1) the County Auditor  
            Controller (CAC) is required to make the necessary  
            pass-through payments?"


            In a letter dated May 13, 2014, to DOF from the Department of  
            the Air Force (Air Force Civil Engineer Center), regarding  
            IVDA's recognized obligations, the Department of the Air Force  
            notes that "conveyance of all properties to four surrounding  
            cities and San Bernardino County from the DOD (Department of  
            Defense) was accomplished under representations from the joint  
            powers authority that revenues from reuse activities,  
            including the commitment of member revenues and redevelopment  
            tax increment from the economically impacted area around the  
            former base, would be directed to the reuse and operation of  
            the former base property."


          5)Policy Considerations.  The Committee may wish to consider the  
            following:








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  8







             a)   End Date.  Is there an end anticipated for the member  
               contributions and pass through that the bill would be  
               allowing?  If not, that runs contrary to the point of RDA  
               dissolution which is to wind down RDA activities, not allow  
               them to continue into perpetuity.


             b)   IVDA Obligations.  Are the member contributions and  
               water district pass through revenues pledged to pay off  
               bond debt pre June 28, 2011, in accordance with RDA  
               dissolution law, or are these revenues anticipated to be  
               used to fund ongoing base reuse projects into the future?   
               If it is to continue funding base reuse projects going  
               forward, then this runs contrary to RDA dissolution laws.


             c)   Different Approaches and Options.  While the bill allows  
               the member contributions and pass through agreements to  
               continue to exist, the Committee may wish to ask the author  
               and sponsor whether the following options were  
               contemplated, and if so, to discuss why these options (none  
               of which require state legislation) are not feasible:


               i)     Local Agreement.  If all the cities and the County  
                 agree that they should put in tax increment to fund  
                 IVDA's ongoing activities, why not do it through a  
                 separate local agreement?  


               ii)    Infrastructure and Revitalization Financing District  
                 (IRFD).  AB 229 (John Perez), Chapter 775, Statutes of  
                 2014, created infrastructure and revitalization financing  
                 districts, modeled after infrastructure financing  
                 districts.  AB 229 specifically allowed a military base  
                 reuse authority to form an IRFD in order to finance a  
                 broad range of projects and facilities to clean-up and  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  9





                 redevelop former military bases.


               iii)   Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD).   
                 SB 628 (Beall), Chapter 785, Statutes of 2014, provided  
                 broad authorities for local agencies to use tax increment  
                 to finance a wide variety of projects, including  
                 infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and wastewater and  
                 groundwater facilities; affordable housing, mixed-use  
                 development and sustainable development; transit-oriented  
                 development; light rail; industrial structures; parks and  
                 open space; libraries; child care facilities; military  
                 base reuse; and brownfields remediation.  EIFDs provide  
                 broad flexibility in funding and no public vote is  
                 required to establish an authority, although a 55% vote  
                 is required to issue bonds.  EIFDs can cross  
                 jurisdictional boundaries and involve multiple cities and  
                 a county and there are no geographic limitations where it  
                 can be used.


               iv)    Community Revitalization and Investment Authority  
                 (CRIA).  AB 2 (Alejo and E. Garcia), Chapter 319,  
                 Statutes of 2015, authorized local governments to create  
                 CRIAs to use tax increment revenue to improve  
                 infrastructure, assist businesses, and support affordable  
                 housing in disadvantaged communities.  AB 2 specifically  
                 allowed a CRIA to carry out a plan within an area that is  
                 within a former military base that is principally  
                 characterized by deteriorated or inadequate  
                 infrastructure and structures.


             d)   Vague Language.  Language in the bill that adds to the  
               definition of enforceable obligations, specifically,  
               "including, but not limited to, federal base reuse  
               obligations for the former Norton Air Force Base as  
               confirmed by the 1990 Joint Powers Agreement providing for  
               member contributions and by the 1990 cooperation agreement  








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  10





               pass with a state water contractor" is vague and confusing.  
                Should the bill move forward, the author may wish to  
               strengthen this language by striking "including, but not  
               limited to" and more specifically defining both the 1990  
               Joint Powers Agreement and the cooperation agreement with  
               the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District so that  
               the intent is clear.


          6)Arguments in Support.  Supporters argue that the bill will  
            once again allow tax revenues pledged in 1990 to flow to IVDA,  
            and is important to maximize job creation and economic  
            development activities in and around the former base, ensuring  
            that the original federal obligations and base reuse plan are  
            realized.


          7)Arguments in Opposition.  None on file.


          8)Double-Referral.  This bill is double-referred to the Housing  
            and Community Development Committee.





          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:




          Support


          Cities of Colton, Loma Linda, and San Bernardino


          Highland Area Chamber of Commerce








                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  11







          Hillwood


          Inland Empire Economic Partnership


          Matich Corporation


          San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce


          San Bernardino City Unified School District


          San Bernardino Community College District


          San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools




          Opposition


          None on file




          Analysis Prepared by:Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958













                                                                    AB 2514


                                                                    Page  12