BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó

          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        SB 817|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |


          Bill No:  SB 817
          Author:   Roth (D), et al.
          Amended:  8/18/16  
          Vote:     21 

           SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE:  7-0, 3/30/16
           AYES:  Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach,  

           AYES:  Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

           SENATE FLOOR:  38-0, 5/31/16
           AYES:  Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,  
            Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,  
            Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Huff, Jackson, Lara,  
            Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning,  
            Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone,  
            Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Hueso, Runner

           SENATE FLOOR:  39-0, 8/30/16
           AYES:  Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,  
            Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,  
            Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,  
            Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning,  
            Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone,  
            Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  77-0, 8/22/16 - See last page for vote

           SUBJECT:   Local government finance:  property tax revenue  
                     allocations:  vehicle license fee adjustments


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  2

          SOURCE:    Author

          DIGEST:  This bill changes the formulas for calculating annual  
          vehicle license fee adjustment amounts for four cities that  
          incorporated after 2004.


          Existing law:

          1)Imposes the vehicle license fee (VLF) in lieu of personal  
            property tax on California motor vehicles, at a rate based on  
            the taxable value of the vehicle. 

          2)Funds public safety realignment programs with VLF revenues  
            that, before the passage of SB 89 (Senate Budget and Fiscal  
            Review Committee, Chapter 35, Statutes of 2011), would have  
            been allocated to four cities that incorporated after January  
            1, 2004.

          This bill establishes a vehicle license adjustment amount for a  
          city incorporating after January 1, 2004, and on or before  
          January 1, 2012, as follows:

          1)A formula to calculate the base year VLF adjustment amount for  
            fiscal year (FY) 2016-17 which uses the population of the  
            incorporating city, times the sum of the most recent VLF  
            adjustment amount for all cities in the county, divided by the  
            sum of the population of all the cities in the county; and

          2)A formula to calculate the VLF adjustment amount for the  
            2017-2018 FY, and each FY thereafter, that includes the  
            percentage change from the immediately preceding FY to the  
            current FY in gross taxable assessed valuation.


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  3


          In 1998, the Legislature began cutting the VLF rate from 2% to  
          0.65% of a vehicle's value.  The State General Fund backfilled  
          the lost VLF revenues to cities and counties.  As part of the  
          2004-05 Budget agreement, the Legislature enacted the  
          "VLF-property tax swap," which replaced the VLF backfill from  
          the State General Fund with property tax revenues that otherwise  
          would have gone to schools through the Educational Revenue  
          Augmentation Fund (ERAF).  This replacement funding is known as  
          the "VLF adjustment amount."  The State General Fund backfills  
          schools for their lost ERAF money.

          The VLF-property tax swap did not reallocate extra property tax  
          revenues to cities that were not in existence when the State was  
          compensating cities for the difference between the 2% and 0.65%  
          VLF rates.  As a result, new cities received less VLF funding  
          than they would have if they had incorporated before the  
          VLF-property tax swap.  

          Advocates for cities asked the Legislature to reallocate a  
          portion of existing cities' remaining VLF funds to new cities to  
          help make new city incorporations financially feasible.  In  
          response, the Legislature passed AB 1602 (Laird, Chapter 556,  
          Statutes of 2006), which changed the allocation of VLF funds to  
          restore the VLF revenues for city incorporations that were lost  
          under the VLF-property tax "swap."  AB 1602's formula allocated  
          $50 per capita adjusted annually for growth.

          Governor Brown's 2011 Realignment Proposal shifted the  
          responsibility for some state public safety programs to local  
          governments.  The Legislature passed SB 89 (Senate Budget and  
          Fiscal Review Committee, Chapter 35, Statutes of 2011), which  
          re-calculated the Department of Motor Vehicle's administration  
          fund to $25 million and increased vehicle license registration  
          by $12 per vehicle to offset DMV's cut budget.  SB 89 also  


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  4

          eliminated VLF revenues allocated to cities and shifted those  
          revenues to fund public safety realignment.  Proposition 30  
          (2012) amended the State Constitution to permanently dedicate a  
          portion of the sales tax and VLF to local governments to pay for  
          the programs realigned in 2011-12.

          Four new cities incorporated after the Laird bill enacted new  
          VLF funding allocations for new cities and before those  
          allocations were repealed.  The City of Wildomar incorporated on  
          July 1, 2008.  The City of Menifee incorporated on October 1,  
          2008.  The City of Eastvale incorporated on October 1, 2010.   
          Most recently, the City of Jurupa Valley officially incorporated  
          on July 1, 2011, only two days after SB 89 repealed the VLF  
          allocation formulas for new cities.

          Advocates for cities argue that SB 89's elimination of VLF  
          allocations creates fiscal hardships for cities that  
          incorporated with the expectation that they would receive VLF  
          revenues under the formulas enacted by the 2006 Laird bill.


          By abruptly eliminating VLF allocations for recently  
          incorporated cities, SB 89 pulled the rug out from under four  
          cities that chose to incorporate based, in part, on the  
          expectation that they would receive VLF funding under the  
          formulas enacted by the 2006 Laird bill.  After SB 89's  
          enactment, each of the four cities had to make substantial cuts  
          to vital public services that would have been funded by VLF  
          allocations.  In the City of Jurupa Valley, SB 89's fiscal  
          effect was particularly severe, resulting in a loss of 46% of  
          the city's first year General Fund revenues and a 26% loss of  
          General Fund revenues in subsequent years.  This bill helps to  
          rebalance the four cities' finances by restoring some  
          VLF-related funding.



                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  5

          Related/Prior Legislation

          SB 25 (Roth, 2015) and SB 69 (Roth, 2014), both of which  
          contained provisions that were nearly identical to this bill's  
          VLFAA formula for cities that incorporated after 2004, were  
          vetoed by Governor Brown.

          SB 56 (Roth, 2013) and AB 677 (Fox, 2013) both contained VLF  
          adjustments amounts similar to the provisions in this bill for  
          city incorporations, but included adjustments for annexations as  
          well.  SB 56 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee's  
          Suspense File.  AB 677 was referred to, but never heard by, the  
          Assembly Local Government Committee.

          SB 1566 (Negrete McLeod, 2012) and AB 1098 (Carter, 2012) also  
          would have reallocated VLF revenues to newly incorporated cities  
          and to cities that annexed inhabited territory.  SB 1566 was  
          held on the Senate Appropriations Committee's Suspense File.  AB  
          1098 was amended during the last two days of the 2011-12  
          legislative session to contain SB 1566's provisions, but was  
          subsequently vetoed by the Governor.

          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:YesLocal:   Yes

          According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

          1)On-going costs of approximately $18 million (General Fund  
            (GF)) to backfill property tax reductions.  This bill will  
            result in a one-time shift of approximately $18 million from  
            the Riverside County ERAF to the cities of Jurupa Valley,  
            Eastvale, Menifee, and Wildomar, and permanently "re-base" the  
            VLF adjustment amount going forward.  The GF would generally  
            backfill the reductions from ERAF to replace funding that  
            would otherwise go to schools pursuant to Proposition 98  


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  6

            minimum funding guarantees.  This amount would increase each  
            year thereafter by the property tax growth rate.  

          2)Unknown, likely minor state reimbursable costs to Riverside  
            County to adjust property tax allocation formulas for the four  
            recently-incorporated cities (GF).  It is unlikely that the  
            county would file a claim for reimbursement for these minor  
            one-time costs.

          SUPPORT:   (Verified10/20/16)

          Alameda County LAFCO
          California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions
          California Police Chiefs Association
          California State Association of Counties
          City of Eastvale
          City of Jurupa Valley
          City of Menifee
          City of Riverside
          City of Wildomar
          Contra Costa County LAFCO
          County of Riverside
          League of California Cities
          Riverside LAFCO
          Riverside Sheriffs Association
          San Mateo County LAFCO
          Solano County LAFCO
          Southwest California Legislative Council
          Urban Counties of California
          Yolo County LAFCO

          OPPOSITION:   (Verified10/20/16)

          None received


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  7


               I am returning Senate Bill 817 without my signature.

               This bill allows four cities that incorporated after  
               January 1, 2004 and before January 1, 2012 to receive  
               additional property tax revenue through a redistribution of  
               Vehicle License Fee revenue.

               Last year, in recognition of the fiscal challenges these  
               four cities confront, I signed SB 107 which provided them  
               approximately $24 million dollars. While I commend Senator  
               Roth's tireless commitment to assist the cities, this bill  
               requires the state to make additional and long term General  
               Fund spending commitments. As such, this proposal must be  
               considered in light of other budget priorities during  
               upcoming budget deliberations.

          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  77-0, 8/22/16
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,  
            Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,  
            Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,  
            Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth  
            Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto,  
            Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden,  
            Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder,  
            Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina,  
            Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson,  
            Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth,  
            Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk,  
            Williams, Wood, Rendon
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Gordon, Roger Hernández, Melendez

          Prepared by:Anton Favorini-Csorba / GOV. & F. / (916) 651-4119
          10/24/16 11:32:33

                                   ****  END  ****


                                                                     SB 817  
                                                                    Page  8