BILL ANALYSIS
AB 904
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 904 (V. Manuel Perez)
As Amended May 4, 2009
Majority vote
LOCAL GOVERNMENT 7-0 APPROPRIATIONS 15-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Caballero, Knight, |Ayes:|De Leon, Nielsen, |
| |Arambula, Davis, Duvall, | |Ammiano, |
| |Krekorian, Skinner | |Charles Calderon, Davis, |
| | | |Duvall, Fuentes, Hall, |
| | | |Harkey, John A. Perez, |
| | | |Price, Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Audra Strickland, |
| | | |Torlakson |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Specifies that a business engaged in the manufacturing
of parts or components related to the production of electricity
using solar, wind, biomass, hydropower, or geothermal resources
on or after July 1, 2010, is eligible under the California
Investment Incentive Program (CIIP).
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes the governing body of a county, city and county, or
a city to establish a capital investment incentive program
whereby the local agency would pay a capital investment
incentive amount to the proponent of a qualified manufacturing
facility for up to 15 consecutive fiscal years upon the
approval of a written request from the proponent.
2)Provides that the annual amount of the capital investment
incentive would be the local agency's share of the property
tax on the facility's assessed value in excess of $150
million.
3)Provides that the proponent must enter into a community
services agreement with the local agency, which shall include
the payment by the proponent to the local agency of a
community services fee equal to 25% of the capital investment
incentive amount, up to
AB 904
Page 2
$2 million.
4)Allows multiple agencies to establish the program (i.e., the
county and a city could establish the program for the same
facility).
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Minor, probably absorbable, costs to the Business
Transportation, and Housing Agency, which is responsible under
the CIIP program for approval of a proponent's application for
certification of a qualified manufacturing facility.
2)No direct impact on state revenues, as the bill merely
authorizes cities and counties to provide incentive payments
for specified businesses from their share of property tax
revenues.
COMMENTS : This bill, sponsored by Imperial County, will expand
the list of eligible businesses for CIIP to include those that
are engaged in the manufacturing of parts or components related
to the production of electricity using solar, wind, biomass,
hydropower, or geothermal resources on or after July 1, 2010.
CIIP authorizes cities and counties to pay a qualified
manufacturing facility a "capital investment incentive amount" -
essentially a property tax rebate on the amount of the assessed
value of the facility in excess of $150 million - for up to 15
years, if the governing body of the city or county elects to
establish a CIIP in their jurisdiction. To qualify for this
incentive, the manufacturer must: 1) establish a job creation
plan; 2) pay the city or county an annual "community services
fee" equal to 25% of the rebated property taxes, or $2 million,
whichever is less; and, 3) sign an agreement to repay the
property tax rebate if certain conditions are not met.
CIIP was created in 1997 [SB 566 (Thompson), Chapter 616] to
allow local agencies to provide a reduction in property taxes as
a means to attract very large, high-tech manufacturing plants.
The Legislature originally passed CIIP to help Placer County
officials attract an Intel plant, but they never used the law.
In 1999, CIIP was expanded to allow mineral-recovery geothermal
businesses to the list of eligible businesses [SB 133 (Kelley),
AB 904
Page 3
Chapter 24], with the intent of including CalEnergy Company's
plan to extract minerals from geothermal brine. While Imperial
County paid some property tax rebates to that project, CalEnergy
was unable to bring the mineral extraction plant into operation
and repaid the rebates. With the exception of this one
unsuccessful attempt, the tax rebate program has never been
used.
There have been several other attempts to expand the list of
businesses eligible for CIIP.
AB 2129 (Kelley), of 2002, would have allowed an electricity
powerplant that uses solar, wind, geothermal, solid-fuel
biomass, or digester gas to be eligible for CIIP. Assembly
Member Garcia carried a similar measure in 2006 (AB 1966), which
would have allowed a business engaged in the operation of a
powerplant used for the production of electricity from one or
more of the following energy resources: solar thermal, wind,
photovoltaic, geothermal, solid-fuel biomass, fuel cells using
renewable fuel, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megawatts
or less, municipal solid waste conversion, digester gas,
landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, and tidal current to be
eligible for CIIP. Both bills failed passage in the Senate
Local Government Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958
FN: 0000897