BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    





                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  1


          GOVERNOR'S VETO
          AB 338 (Ma)
          As Amended  June 25, 2009
          2/3 vote

           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |48-31|(June 1, 2009)  |SENATE: |22-16|(September 3,  |
          |           |     |                |        |     |2009)          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |48-29|(September 10,  |        |     |               |
          |           |     |2009)           |        |     |               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
           Original Committee Reference:   L. GOV.  

           SUMMARY  :  Allows local officials to divert property tax  
          increment revenues to pay for public facilities and amenities  
          within transit village development districts (TVDDs).

           The Senate amendments  :

          1)Define "bus transfer station" as an arrival, departure, or  
            transfer point for the area's intercity, intraregional, or  
            interregional bus service having permanent investment in  
            multiple bus docking facilities, ticketing services, and  
            passenger shelters.

          2)Add double-jointing language to AB 1158 (Hayashi), which was  
            vetoed by the Governor.
           
          EXISTING LAW  :  
           
          1)Authorizes, under the Transit Village Development Planning Act  
            of 1994 (Act), a city or county to prepare a transit village  
            plan (TVP) for a TVDD that addresses the following  
            characteristics:

             a)   A neighborhood centered around a transit station that is  










                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  2


               planned and designed so that residents, workers, shoppers,  
               and others find it convenient and attractive to patronize  
               transit;

             b)   Mix of housing types, including apartments, within not  
               more than a quarter mile of the exterior boundary of the  
               parcel on which the transit station is located;

             c)   Other land uses, including a retail district oriented to  
               the transit station and civic uses, including day care  
               centers and libraries;

             d)   Pedestrian and bicycle access to the transit station,  
               with attractively designed and landscaped pathways;

             e)   A transit system that should encourage and facilitate  
               intermodal service, and access by modes other than single  
               occupant vehicles;

             f)   Demonstrable public benefits beyond the increase in  
               transit usage; and,

             g)   Sites where a density bonus of at least 25% may be  
               granted pursuant to specified performance standards.
          2)Requires a TVP to include any five public benefits from a list  
            of 13 specified public benefits.

          3)Authorizes cities and counties to create infrastructure  
            financing districts (IFDs) and issue bonds to pay for  
            community scale public works:  highways, transit, water  
            systems, sewer projects, flood control, child care facilities,  
            libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities.

          4)Allows an IFD to divert property tax increment revenues from  
            other local governments, excluding school districts, for up to  
            30 years, in order to pay back bonds issued by the IFD.

          5)Requires that in order to form an IFD a city or county must  
            develop an infrastructure plan, send copies to every  
            landowner, consult with other local governments, and hold a  
            public hearing.










                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  3



          6)Requires that when forming an IFD, local officials must find  
            that its public facilities are of communitywide significance  
            and provide significant benefits to an area larger than the  
            IFD.

          7)Requires that every local agency who will contribute its  
            property tax increment revenue to the IFD approve the plan.

          8)Requires a two-thirds voter approval of the formation of the  
            IFD and the issuance of bonds.

          9)Requires majority voter approval for setting the IFD's  
            appropriations limits.

          10)Specifies that public agencies that own land in a proposed  
            IFD may not vote on issues regarding the district.

          11)Authorizes IFDs to issue a variety of debt instruments,  
            including bonds, certificates of participation, leases, and  
            loans.

           AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY  , this bill:

          1)Defined "transit facility," for purposes of being an eligible  
            project within an IFD as any publicly owned facility and  
            amenity necessary to implement a TVP.

          2)Expanded the parcels that shall be included in a TVDD to all  
            parcels located within one-half mile of the main entrance of  
            the transit station.

          3)Specified that an election is not required to form an IFD,  
            adopt an infrastructure financing plan, or issue bonds.

          4)Required, if a city, county, or city and county finances a  
            transit district using tax increment financing (TIF) collected  
            through an IFD, then the city, county, or city and county  
            shall do all of the following:

             a)   Use at least 20% of all revenues derived from the TIF to  










                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  4


               increase, improve, and preserve the supply of lower- and  
               moderate-income housing available in the district at  
               affordable housing costs, and occupied by persons and  
               families of low- or moderate-income, lower- income  
               households, very low-income households, and extremely  
               low-income households;
             b)   Require that the housing units listed above remain  
               available at affordable housing cost to, and occupied by,  
               persons and families of low- or moderate-income and  
               very-low income and extremely-low income households for the  
               longest feasible time, but not for less than 55 years for  
               rental units and 45 years for owner-occupied units;

             c)   Rehabilitate, develop, or construct, or cause to be  
               rehabilitated, developed, or constructed, for rental or  
               sale to persons and families of low- or moderate-income, an  
               equal number of replacement dwelling units that have an  
               equal or greater number of bedrooms as the destroyed or  
               removed units, at affordable housing costs within the  
               district, and within four years after the destruction or  
               removal, whenever dwelling units housing persons and  
               families of low- or moderate-income are destroyed or  
               removed from the low- and moderate-income housing market as  
               part of the development of a transit district that is  
               subject to a written agreement with the city, county, or  
               city and county, or when financial assistance has been  
               provided by the city, county, or city and county;

             d)   Required that the replacement dwelling units be  
               available at affordable housing cost to and occupied by,  
               persons and families in the same or a lower-income category  
               as the persons and families displaced from those destroyed  
               or removed units;

             e)   Included in the TVP, as one of the five demonstrable  
               public benefits, either an increased stock of affordable  
               housing or live-travel options for transit-needy groups;  
               and,

             f)   Included in the TVP provisions on how to implement the  
               affordable housing requirements added by this measure.










                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  5



           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, there is no state fiscal effect, as the bill excludes  
          school districts, community college districts, and county  
          offices of education from participation in transit development  
          district tax increment financing.

           COMMENTS  :  Many local governments and transit agencies  
          understand the benefits of using transit-oriented development  
          (TOD) as an urban planning tool to help communities deal with  
          the possible negative impact of unrestricted growth and sprawl.   
          Some of these impacts include growing traffic gridlock and  
          commuting times, the loss of open space, and increased air and  
          water pollution.  Working with local transit agencies, local  
          communities are creating strong centralized mixed-use  
          communities by developing TOD projects that are clustered around  
          train stations and bus centers.  The environment and local  
          economies are enhanced by TOD, and the publicly supported  
          transit systems benefit from nearby residents and businesses.

          However, there are roadblocks to TOD development in the state,  
          including the long planning process and spiraling construction  
          costs.  The Act provides no funding mechanism to help deliver  
          the improvements outlined in the legislation.  The reality is  
          that TOD projects must compete with other local priorities and a  
          scarcity of transportation funding.

          According to the author, this bill helps resolve this dilemma of  
          transit village funding scarcity by making available a new  
          funding tool to communities and transit districts that choose to  
          pursue TOD.  This bill allows local communities to use TIF so  
          they can finance current improvements that will create future  
          gains in property tax revenues.  The author points out that when  
          a TOD project is completed there is an increase in the value of  
          the surrounding areas that often spurs new investment.  This  
          increased site value and investment creates additional taxable  
          property that can increase incoming tax revenues to local  
          communities.  The increase in TIF would be used to finance the  
          debt issued to pay for the project.  This bill also requires  
          that 20% of the collected TIF go towards funding affordable  
          housing in the transit district.










                                                                  AB 338

                                                                  Page  6



          AB 1221 (Ma) was an identical measure passed by the Legislature  
          last year; however, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the measure  
          using the blanket veto message regarding the delayed Budget. 

           GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE  :

          "This bill would eliminate voter approval requirements for the  
          creation of an IFD and the issuance of tax allocation bonds by  
          an IFD.  In doing so, this measure would undermine the rights of  
          voters to approve or reject proposals to redirect their tax  
          dollars and incur public debt.  Unlike the creation of a  
          redevelopment plan, the creation of an IFD is not conditioned  
          upon a finding of blight, or upon any other statutory or  
          constitutional restraints other than strict voter approval  
          requirements.  As such, elections are the sole basis of public  
          input and fiscal discipline in the creation of an IFD, and it is  
          necessary to require voter approval."


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)  
          319-3958 


                                                                FN: 0003326