BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                                                       Bill No:  AB  
          50
          
                 SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                       Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
                           2009-2010 Regular Session
                                 Staff Analysis



          AB 50  Author:  Nava
          As Proposed to be Amended:  June 23, 2009
          Hearing Date:  June 23, 2009
          Consultant:  Chris Lindstrom


                                     SUBJECT  

                                Disaster relief.

                                   DESCRIPTION
           
          AB 50, an urgency measure, adds the wildfires that occurred  
          in Southern California in 2007 to the list of disasters  
          that are eligible for full reimbursement of local agency  
          costs under the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA).   
          AB 50 also adds the wildfires that occurred in Santa  
          Barbara County in 2008 and 2009 to the list of disasters  
          eligible for full state reimbursement of local property tax  
          losses, beneficial homeowners' property tax exemption  
          treatment, and special "carry forward" treatment of excess  
          disaster losses.  

          AB 50, which has been dually referred to the Senate  
          Committees on Governmental Organization (GO) and Revenue  
          and Taxation (Rev & Tax), makes changes to the Government  
          Code which falls within the jurisdiction of GO, as well as,  
          changes to the Revenue and Taxation Code which falls within  
          the jurisdiction of Rev & Tax.  

          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Makes the following changes to the Government Code:

             a)   Adds the wildfires that occurred in Southern  
               California starting on or about October 20, 2007, to  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 2
          


               the list of disasters eligible for full state  
               reimbursement of local agency costs.

             b)   Deletes provisions in current law that require the  
               inclusion of certain elements in a local hazard  
               mitigation plan, including an initial earthquake  
               performance evaluation of public facilities that are  
               potentially hazardous, and a plan to reduce the  
               potential risk from private and government facilities  
               in the event of a disaster.

          2)Makes the following changes to the Revenue and Taxation  
            Code:

             a)   Provides a mechanism for reimbursing Santa Barbara  
               County for property tax losses resulting from the  
               reassessment of properties damaged by the Santa  
               Barbara Wildfires.

             b)   Provides that any dwelling that qualified for a  
               homeowners' property tax exemption before the Santa  
               Barbara Wildfires, that was damaged or destroyed by  
               the Santa Barbara Wildfires, and that has not changed  
               ownership since the Santa Barbara Wildfires, shall not  
               be denied a homeowners' exemption solely because that  
               dwelling was temporarily damaged or destroyed, or was  
               being reconstructed by the owner, or was temporarily  
               uninhabited as a result of restricted access.

             c)   Provides that any taxpayer's excess disaster loss  
               resulting from the Santa Barbara Wildfires shall be  
               carried forward to each of the five taxable years  
               following the taxable year for which the loss is  
               claimed.  However, if there is any excess disaster  
               loss remaining after this five-year period, then the  
               applicable percentage of that excess disaster loss  
               shall be carried forward to each of the next 10  
               taxable years. 

          3)Specifies that, if the Commission on State Mandates  
            determines that this bill contains costs mandated by the  
            state, local agencies and school districts will be  
            reimbursed for those costs.

          4)Takes effect immediately as an urgency measure.





          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 3
          


                                   EXISTING LAW

           Existing law, the CDAA, provides that the state must pay  
          75% of the non-federal share of eligible costs for any  
          state-declared emergency.  For some statutorily specified  
          disasters the state is required to pay 100 percent of the  
          non-federal cost.

          Existing law allows the Legislature to provide for a state  
          share of local costs that exceeds 75% of total state  
          eligible costs if the city, county, or city and county has  
          adopted a local hazard mitigation plan (HMP) in accordance  
          with the federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000.

          Existing law prohibits the state share of reimbursement for  
          local costs due to a disaster from exceeding 75% of total  
          state eligible costs, unless the local agency is located  
          within a city or county that has adopted a local HMP in  
          accordance with the federal DMA as part of the safety  
          element.

          Existing law requires the HMP to include all of the  
          following elements called for in the federal act  
          requirements:

             a)   An initial earthquake performance evaluation of  
               public facilities that provide essential services,  
               shelter, and critical government functions.

             b)   An inventory of private facilities that are  
               potentially hazardous, including, but not limited to,  
               multiunit, soft story, concrete tilt-up, and concrete  
               frame buildings.

             c)   A plan to reduce the potential risk from private  
               and governmental facilities in the event of a  
               disaster.

          Existing federal law requires, as specified in the federal  
          Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390; 42  
          U.S.C. Sec.5121 et seq.) that:

             a)   As a condition of receipt of an increased federal  
               share for hazard mitigation measures, a state, local,  
               or tribal government shall develop and submit for  
               approval to the President a mitigation plan that  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 4
          


               outlines processes for identifying the natural  
               hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities of the area under  
               the jurisdiction of the government.

             b)   Each mitigation plan developed by a local or tribal  
               government shall: (1) describe actions to mitigate  
               hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities identified under  
               the plan; and (2) establish a strategy to implement  
               those actions.

          Existing law specifies that local jurisdictions that have  
          not adopted a local hazard mitigation plan shall be given  
          preference by the Office of Emergency Services (now the  
          California Emergency Management Agency) in recommending  
          actions to be funded from the Pre-Disaster Mitigation  
          Program, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, and the Flood  
          Mitigation Assistance Program to assist the local  
          jurisdiction in developing and adopting a local hazard  
          mitigation plan, subject to available funding from the  
          Federal Emergency Management Agency.

          The California Constitution, Article XIII, Section 3(k)  
          exempts from property tax the first $7,000 of the assessed  
          value of an owner-occupied principal place of residence.  
          This is commonly referred to as the "homeowners'  
          exemption." 

          Existing law provides that the $7,000 homeowners' exemption  
          is available to a dwelling that is occupied as the owner's  
          principal place of residence. Eligibility is generally  
          continuous once granted. However, if a property becomes  
          vacant or is under construction on the lien date, which is  
          January 1, it is not eligible for the exemption for the  
          upcoming tax year.

          Existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors to  
          provide by ordinance for the reassessment of property that  
          is damaged or destroyed by a major disaster without the  
          fault of the assessed. 

          Existing law allows non-business taxpayers with casualty  
          losses that are not reimbursed by insurance and that exceed  
          $100 plus 10% of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income (AGI)  
          to claim these losses as itemized deductions on their tax  
          return.  Taxpayers may carry forward 100% of any remaining  
          losses for up to 10 years.  Corporate taxpayers with  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 5
          


          casualty losses that are not reimbursed by insurance are  
          not subject to the $100 plus 10% of AGI threshold, but are  
          subject to the same carry forward rules that apply to  
          individual taxpayers.  

          Existing law allows both individual and corporate taxpayers  
          who experience losses as a result of certain named  
          disasters to claim these losses either in the year in which  
          the loss occurred or in the preceding year.

                                    BACKGROUND
           
          Purpose of the bill.  The author has introduced AB 50 to  
          provide financial relief to those affected by the Southern  
          California Wildfires of 2007 and the Santa Barbara  
          Wildfires of 2008 and 2009.
          
          Government Code provisions of the bill.  The CDAA requires  
          the state share for non-federal eligible costs to be  
          apportioned on a 75% state/25% local government share  
          basis.  For certain disasters (e.g., 1989 Loma Prieta  
          earthquake, 1991 East Bay Fire, 1994 Northridge earthquake,  
          the 2001 Southern California wildfires), the law provides  
          that the state cover up to 100% of the non-federal eligible  
          costs.  

          This measure would provide for the state to cover up to  
          100% of the non-federal share of costs associated with the  
          wildfires that occurred in Southern California commencing  
          on October 20, 2007, as specified in agreements for federal  
          assistance between this state and the United States.  

          Last year, SB 1537 (Kehoe) added the 2007 Southern  
          California wildfires to the list of disasters eligible for  
          coverage of 100% of the non-federal costs, but the bill  
          would only become effective if SB 1764 (Kehoe) was also  
          signed into law.  The Governor vetoed SB 1764 thereby  
          nullifying the changes proposed by SB 1537, as well.  AB 50  
          would correct that problem by re-authorizing the state to  
          cover up to 100% of the non-federal share of costs  
          associated with the wildfires that occurred in Southern  
          California commencing on October 20, 2007.

          In addition, AB 50 modifies section 65302.6 of the  
          Government Code related to HMPs.  These changes are  
          necessary to ensure that state statute is consistent with  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 6
          


          the federal requirements for HMPs.  A majority of the  
          counties and cities in California, including all of the  
          counties covered by this proposal, have completed HMPs as  
          per the federal guidelines.  In 2006, however, AB 2140  
          added requirements to the HMPs that followed the intent,  
          but were not consistent with, the federal guidelines.  AB  
          50 would make the necessary changes to the Government Code  
          in order for the state requirements to be consistent with  
          the federal requirements.

          Revenue and Taxation Code provisions of the bill.   
          Provisions of the Revenue and Taxation Code provide  
          financial assistance to individuals and local governments  
          affected by natural disasters, such as:

          1)Property Tax Reassessment - Current law allows each  
            county, by ordinance, to provide for the reassessment of  
            properties damaged by a calamity, disaster, or  
            misfortune.  Taxpayers owning damaged property must apply  
            for a reassessment within the time period specified in  
            the applicable county's ordinance or within 12 months of  
            the misfortune or calamity, whichever is later.  The  
            application for reassessment must show the condition and  
            value of the property after the damage and the dollar  
            value of the damage.  Once the property is reassessed,  
            the taxpayer is entitled to a refund of any excess  
            property tax paid on the property.  If the affected  
            property is subsequently repaired, its value is subject  
            to an upward reassessment by the county.

          2)Homeowners' Exemption - Current law:

             a)   Exempts the first $7,000 of the full value of a  
               dwelling from property tax, when the dwelling is  
               occupied by an owner as his/her principal residence.   
               However, if a property is no longer owner-occupied or  
               is vacant on the lien date (January 1), the property  
               is not eligible for the exemption for the succeeding  
               tax year; and,  

             b)   Provides certain disaster-related exceptions to the  
               general rule that a property must be owner-occupied on  
               the lien date to receive the homeowners' exemption.   
               Under these exceptions, properties that were eligible  
               for the homeowners' exemption immediately before the  
               disaster, do not change ownership after the disaster,  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 7
          


               and are vacant solely because of damage incurred  
               during the disaster, continue to be eligible for the  
               homeowners' exemption.

          1)Income Tax Losses - Current law:   

             a)   Allows non-business taxpayers with casualty losses  
               that are not reimbursed by insurance and that exceed  
               $100 plus 10% of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income  
               (AGI) to claim these losses as itemized deductions on  
               their tax return.  Taxpayers may carry forward 100% of  
               any remaining losses for up to 10 years.  Corporate  
               taxpayers with casualty losses that are not reimbursed  
               by insurance are not subject to the $100 plus 10% of  
               AGI threshold, but are subject to the same carry  
               forward rules that apply to individual taxpayers; and,  


             b)   Allows both individual and corporate taxpayers who  
               experience losses as a result of certain named  
               disasters to claim these losses either in the year in  
               which the loss occurred or in the preceding year.

          AB 50 makes the necessary changes to the Revenue and  
          Taxation Code to provide financial relief to those affected  
          by the Santa Barbara Wildfires and a property tax revenue  
          backfill to Santa Barbara County.  Proponents of AB 50  
          note, "The bill would reimburse Santa Barbara County for  
          property tax losses related to the wildfires of November  
          2008.  The bill further provides that dwellings that  
          qualified for the homeowner's property tax exemption may  
          not be denied the exemptions solely due to it being  
          damaged, destroyed, on uninhabitable by those wildfires."  

                            PRIOR/RELATED LEGISLATION
           
           SB 1308 (Cox), Chapter 400, Statutes of 2008  .  Provides for  
          up to 100% state reimbursement to local governments for the  
          costs associated with the Angora Fire in South Lake Tahoe  
          which occurred in June and July 2007.

           SB 1537 (Kehoe) Chapter 355, Statutes of 2008  .  Provides  
          for up to 100% state reimbursement to local governments for  
          the costs associated with the Wildfires that devastated  
          Southern California in October, 2007.  Becomes operative  
          only if SB 1764 of the 2007-2008 Regular Session is  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 8
          


          enacted.

















































          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 9
          


           SB 1764 (Kehoe), 2007-2008 Legislative Session  .  Would have  
          required a local agency, on or after on January 1, 2010, to  
          obtain an annual certification by the State Fire Marshal to  
          be eligible to receive a percentage for a state share for  
          an eligible project in excess of 75 percent.  (Vetoed by  
          the Governor)

               Veto Message:

               I am returning Senate Bill 1764 without my signature.

               This bill prohibits a city or county, in the event of  
               a wildfire, from receiving full reimbursement from the  
               state for disaster-related costs, unless that city or  
               county has obtained certification from the Department  
               of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) for  
               specified fire protection requirements.

               When a fire disaster occurs, it is vital that all  
               levels of government commit resources to protect  
               public health and safety.  Local governments should  
               have incentives to increase prevention, but they  
               should also have incentives to respond to a disaster  
               whenever one might occur.

               Current law correctly requires local governments to  
               have adopted an overarching Local Hazard Mitigation  
               Plan and submitted it to the state to receive 100% of  
               their California Disaster Assistance Act funding.   
               This type of broad based planning is appropriate and  
               serves a dual purpose because federal grant  
               distribution is also based on those plans.  By  
               preventing a local government from receiving  
               reimbursement from the state unless they meet the  
               specifications of this bill, it provides a perverse  
               incentive for areas that might not have met the bill's  
               requirements, even for technical reasons.

               A more appropriate fiscal incentive program would not  
               focus on holding hostage funds already expended in an  
               emergency, but would provide both local and state  
               funding to reward disaster preparation and prevention.  
                The Emergency Response Initiative I proposed in this  
               year's budget would have done so.  As I proposed, this  
               initiative would have provided $139 million each year  
               to initially increase our disaster response  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 10
          


               capabilities.  This could have been expanded to  
               provide financial incentives, through grants to local  
               governments, for increasing disaster prevention  
               activities as well.  Unfortunately, the Legislature  
               rejected this proposal.

               Nonetheless, I look forward to working with the  
               Legislature in the next session to continue to look  
               for new ways to fund both disaster prevention and  
               response activities.

               For these reasons, I am returning this bill without my  
               signature.

           AB 1798 (Berg), Chapter 896, Statutes of 2006  .  Adds the  
          severe rainstorms that occurred in selected counties in  
          Northern California from December 17, 2005, to January 3,  
          2006, to the list of disasters eligible for full state  
          reimbursement of local agency costs under the Disaster  
          Assistance Act.

           AB 2140 (Hancock), Chapter 739, Statutes of 2006  .   
          Authorized a city or county to adopt a local hazard  
          mitigation plan (HMP) with the safety element of its  
          general plan, and created incentives for local governments  
          to adopt HMPs. 
           
          AB 2735 (Nava), Chapter 897, Statutes of 2006  .  Adds the  
          severe rainstorms that occurred in selected counties in  
          Northern California from December 17, 2005, to January 3,  
          2006, to the list of disasters eligible for full state  
          reimbursement of local agency costs under the Disaster  
          Assistance Act.

           AB 164 (Nava and Bass), Chapter 623, Statutes of 2005  .   
          Adds the severe storms, flooding, debris flows, and  
          mudslides that occurred in the Counties of Kern, Los  
          Angeles, Santa Barbara and Ventura in December 2004,  
          January 2005, February 2005, and March 2005, to the list of  
          disasters eligible for full state reimbursement of local  
          agency costs under the Disaster Assistance Act.

           SB 457 (Kehoe), Chapter 622, Statutes of 2005  .  Adds the  
          severe rainstorms, floods, mudslides, and other events that  
          occurred the Counties of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino,  
          and San Diego during December 2004, January 2005, February  




          AB 50 (Nava) continued                                   
          Page 11
          


          2005, March 2005, and June 2005 to the list of disasters  
          eligible for full state reimbursement of local agency costs  
          under the Disaster Assistance Act.

           AB 1510 (Kehoe), Chapter 772, Statutes of 2004  .  Adds the  
          Southern California wildfires that occurred during October  
          and November 2003 and the San Simeon earthquake that  
          occurred during December 2003 to the list of disasters  
          eligible for full state reimbursement of local agency costs  
          under the Disaster Assistance Act.

           SUPPORT:   As of June 19, 2009:

          American Federation of State, County and Municipal  
          Employees
          California Special Districts Association
          California State Association of Counties
          County of Santa Barbara
          County of San Diego (sponsor)

           OPPOSE:   None on file as of June 19, 2009.

           DUAL REFERRAL:   Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee
           
          FISCAL COMMITTEE:   Senate Appropriations Committee



                                   **********