BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1188|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VETO
Bill No: SB 1188
Author: McGuire (D), Nielsen (R), and Wolk (D), et al.
Introduced:2/18/16
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 9-0, 4/12/16
AYES: Pavley, Stone, Allen, Hertzberg, Hueso, Jackson,
Monning, Vidak, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/27/16
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen
SENATE FLOOR: 37-0, 5/31/16
AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,
Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,
Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,
Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Monning, Moorlach,
Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak,
Wieckowski, Wolk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Lara, Mitchell, Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 77-0, 8/18/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Wildlife management areas: payment of taxes and
assessments
SOURCE: Rural Counties Representatives of California
DIGEST: This bill requires, instead of authorizes, the
Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) to pay annual in lieu
payments and specified assessments to counties in which wildlife
management areas are located.
SB 1188
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Exempts state lands, including wildlife management areas, from
property taxes.
2)Authorizes DFW to compensate counties for lost property taxes
and certain assessments resulting from the establishment of a
wildlife management area. Payments to counties are equal to
the county taxes levied upon the property at the time the
state acquired the property, plus an assessments levied upon
the property by any irrigation, drainage, or reclamation
district.
This bill requires, instead of authorizes, DFW to pay annual in
lieu payments to counties in which wildlife management areas are
located. It also requires, instead of authorizes, DFW to pay
assessments levied upon the property by any irrigation,
drainage, or reclamation district.
Background
DFW operates 11 wildlife management areas covering over 700,000
acres throughout the state. Typically wildlife management areas
are located in rural areas and they are designed to protect
natural ecosystems (such as wetlands) and improve habitat for
fish and wildlife. Also, these areas often provide hunting,
fishing, wildlife viewing, and outdoor education opportunities.
According to the California Constitution, state lands (including
wildlife management areas) are exempt from the property tax.
However, state law specifies that DFW shall provide those
counties containing wildlife management areas with payments from
SB 1188
Page 3
funds available to the department. These "payments in lieu of
taxes" (PILT) are designed to offset lost property tax revenues
that counties and other local governments would be able to
collect on these properties if they were not state-owned.
PILT payments were made between 1957 and 2002 from the General
Fund. A partial payment was made in FY 2002-03. Since then the
state stopped providing PILT payments in the budget in order to
achieve cost savings.
The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) recently noted that some
local governments may be providing services (for example,
maintaining local facilities) on wildlife management areas that
they do not receive property tax revenue from.
In the Budget for FY 2015-16, DFW received $644,000 from the
General Fund to resume PILT payments in 2015-16. The funding
was allocated to 36 counties containing wildlife management
areas with an average payment of just under $17,900.
Until 2015, the language of Section 1504 from the Fish and Game
Code made PILT payments mandatory. Pursuant to SB 83 (Committee
on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 24, Statutes of 2015), PILT
payments became optional. SB 83 also precludes counties from
spending these payments on school districts.
Comments
Policy considerations in providing PILT. As the LAO recently
pointed out, PILT payments are in line with existing statutory
direction and longstanding historical practice before 2002. In
addition, some local governments might provide services on state
wildlife management areas from which they do not receive
property taxes. For example, some counties might incur costs to
maintain local facilities on DFW wildlife management areas, and
might step in to provide law enforcement services when
SB 1188
Page 4
necessary.
That said, no other state department that makes PILT payments to
local jurisdictions for state-owned land. This includes other
state properties for which local governments might provide some
services, such as state buildings owned by the Department of
General Services and state parks. The Administration has also
argued that the lost property taxes can be particularly
challenging for rural counties. While there is some variation,
on average, PILT payments to these counties would be a fraction
of a percent of their non-school property tax revenues.
Staff comments from the Senate Appropriations Committee. Staff
notes that the cost pressures associated with this bill could
equate to an annual appropriation of $644,000. Staff also notes
the $8 million in PILT arrears. If enacted, this bill would
become effective in 2017, and any resulting obligations for PILT
arrears would begin at that time. This bill does not impact any
arrears that may have accrued prior to enactment of the bill.
Related/Prior Legislation
SB 83 (Committee on Budgets, Chapter 24, Statutes of 2015) made
in lieu payment permissive, and prohibited the allocation of in
lieu payments to a school district, a community college
district, or a county superintendent of schools.
SB 234 (Wolk, 2015) would have made a one-time appropriation of
$19 million from the General Fund to the department to pay for
outstanding PILT obligations to counties (The bill was held in
the Senate Appropriations Committee).
SB 1410 (Wolk, 2014) would have appropriated $19 million to pay
the PILT arrears and would have continuously appropriated $2
million annually for future PILT payments (The bill was held in
the Senate Appropriations Committee).
SB 1188
Page 5
AB 1452 (Wolk, 2007) would have appropriated $7,415,000 to pay
PILT arrears (The bill was subsequently amended to a different
subject area).
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:
YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, ongoing annual
cost pressures of $644,000 (General Fund) for annual obligations
to counties for PILT.
SUPPORT: (Verified10/10/16)
Rural County Representatives of California (source)
Alpine County Board of Supervisors
California Central Valley Flood Control Association
California State Association of Counties
Colusa County Board of Supervisors
Glenn County Board of Supervisors
Humboldt County Board of Supervisors
Inyo County Board of Supervisors
Lake County Board of Supervisors
Marin County Board of Supervisors
Merced County Board of Supervisors
Modoc County Board of Supervisors
Mono County Board of Supervisors
Nevada County Board of Supervisors
Northern California Water Association
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
Shasta County Board of Supervisors
Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors
Sutter County Board of Supervisors
Tehama County Board of Supervisors
Yolo County Board of Supervisors
Yuba County Board of Supervisors
SB 1188
Page 6
OPPOSITION: (Verified10/10/16)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author of the bill,
"While urban areas throughout the state have mostly recovered
from the impacts of the Great Recession, rural areas of the
state continue to struggle to provide core services. SB 1188
seeks to provide these much needed and duly owed, funds back to
the affected counties by reverting Fish and Game Code to the
original intent of the law by changing 'may' back to 'shall.'"
According to the sponsor of the bill, Rural County
Representatives of California (RCRC), "While RCRC appreciates
that the Brown Administration included funding in the State
Budget for PILT for the 2015-16 fiscal year after over a decade
of non-payment, and has proposed to fund PILT in the 2016-2017
fiscal year, future Administrations may well choose to simply
not make PILT payments - leaving counties without recourse due
to the now permissive nature of the language. SB1188 will help
ensure that PILT payments are made to counties both today and in
the future, honoring the implicit state commitment that began
over six decades ago."
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
I am returning Senate Bill 1188 without my signature.
The Department of Fish and Wildlife's wildlife areas are a
vast network of public lands that provide hunting, fishing
and refuge for wildlife. Payments in lieu of taxes keep rural
counties whole so that the Department can maintain and
acquire wildlife areas for the public's benefit.
Last year, after twelve years of departure, I included these
payments as part of the State's base budget, and I will
continue to do so.
SB 1188
Page 7
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 77-0, 8/18/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,
Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,
Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,
Cooper, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines,
Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson,
Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden,
Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez,
Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez,
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: Dababneh, Roger Hernández, Kim
Prepared by:Matthew Dumlao / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
10/19/16 10:47:48
**** END ****