BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1791
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 1791 (Monning) - As Amended: April 12, 2010
SUBJECT : Redevelopment: Fort Ord Reuse Plan: project area
territory.
SUMMARY : Exempts specified territory designated in the Fort Ord
Reuse Plan from being prohibited from providing direct
assistance to a development, if certain conditions are met.
Specifically, this bill :
1)States that the prohibition to provide any form of direct
assistance to a development that will be or is on a parcel of
land which has not been previously developed for an urban use
and that will generate sales or use tax does not apply to
specified territory designated in the Fort Ord Reuse Plan that
meets certain conditions.
2)Provides that the exemption applies to territory within a
project area if the Final Base Reuse Plan, as the plan existed
on January 1, 2010, designates the territory as any of the
following:
a) A planned development mixed use district;
b) A business park with light industrial, office, and
research and development mixed uses;
c) A neighborhood retail space;
d) A regional retail space; or,
e) A space designated for visitor services use.
3)Requires, prior to establishing a project area and utilizing
the exemption, a redevelopment agency to adopt a resolution
finding, based on substantial evidence, all of the following:
a) The community has adopted a housing element approved by
the Department of Housing and Community Development;
b) During the three fiscal years prior to the year in which
AB 1791
Page 2
the project area is to be established, the agency has not
been included in the list of agencies that have not
corrected a major audit violation; and,
c) The agency has not accumulated an excess surplus in its
Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits a redevelopment agency from providing direct
assistance to specified projects within a project area,
including a parcel of land of five acres or more that has not
previously been developed for urban use and will, when
developed, generate sales tax that is not attributed to either
office, hotel, manufacturing, or industrial uses unless there
is an enforceable agreement to do so prior to January 1, 1994.
2)Authorizes the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) to establish
the Redevelopment Agency
of Fort Ord (RAFO), the jurisdiction of which includes the
territory of the former Fort Ord Military Base.
3)Specifies that RAFO may not create a project area in any area
which overlays a project area which has been created by a city
or the county.
4)Provides for the distribution of tax increment moneys received
by a redevelopment agency.
5)Requires that all redevelopment plans and implementation plans
prepared in conjunction with, or operation of, a project area,
including updates, amendments, and modifications
be certified by FORA as to their consistency with the Reuse Plan
before those plans or amendments may become effective.
6)Specifies that the assessment roll last equalized prior to the
date FORA adopts the Fort Ord Reuse Plan or the effective date
of the ordinance approving a redevelopment plan for a specific
area within Fort Ord, whichever occurs first, is to be used as
the base year assessment roll for all project areas adopted
within Fort Ord. In order to accomplish this provision, the
Reuse Plan, if adopted first, is deemed to be the
redevelopment plan for the base.
7)Authorizes the waiver of the agency's Low- and Moderate-Income
AB 1791
Page 3
Housing Fund deposits
for up to five years upon an annual finding that the vacancy
rate for rental housing affordable to lower-income households
is 6% or greater.
8)Authorizes the agency to additionally waive one half of the
required 20% set aside annually for the ensuing five years,
provided the finding of a 6% affordable housing vacancy factor
continues to be made.
9)Exempts RAFO from the requirement that barracks demolished or
removed from within the territory of Fort Ord are replaced.
10)Authorizes FORA and the cities and county to use the federal
environmental statement
for the draft of the state Environmental Impact Report.
11)Allows FORA to use redevelopment revenues to finance
infrastructure facilities owned and operated by the California
State University (CSU) and University of California (UC).
12)Specifically states that all provisions of the Community
Redevelopment Law apply to military base conversion
redevelopment agencies.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)By providing an exemption to current law regarding
redevelopment areas and direct assistance, AB 1791 would allow
FORA to provide direct assistance to a development in
specified areas if certain conditions are met.
2)Fort Ord is located in Northern Monterey County generally
between the cities of Monterey to the southeast and Salinas to
the northeast. It borders Monterey Bay to the west and
extends from the City of Seaside in the south to the City of
Marina in the north and to the Salinas River to the east,
encompassing 45 square miles and covering over 28,000 acres.
The Fort Ord Base closure announcement occurred in 1991,
AB 1791
Page 4
generating a mixture of disbelief, economic impacts and
excitement about potential reuse. This land had been part
of the history of Monterey County on the Monterey Peninsula
since 1917. Within months, a series of meetings were
initiated to discuss recovery from the significant closure
impacts
by creating a "vision" for reuse. The meetings included broad
participation from the community including residents,
businesses, government, and special districts, among others.
From those meetings, it was agreed that reuse should focus on
education, environment, and economic development.
Initial efforts to organize governance for reuse faltered.
State Senator Henry Mello sponsored special legislation to
establish a local agency charged with the task of planning,
financing, and implementing reuse [SB 1600 (Mello), Chapter
1169, Statutes of 1994]. That agency was entitled the "Fort
Ord Reuse Authority," and was formed in 1994. FORA has a
governing body of 13 voting members and 11 non-voting members,
and is comprised of representatives from cities, Monterey
County, special districts, public educational institutions,
the military, and state and federal legislators. It is FORA's
responsibility to complete the planning, financing, and
implementation of reuse as described in the FORA Base Reuse
Plan (Plan) that was adopted in 1997. FORA's organizational
structure is set to sunset in 2014.
3)The FORA Plan broadly defines the type of uses that can occur
on the former Fort Ord site and designates general areas where
the different uses can occur. It is similar to a general plan
document of a city or county. Individual projects are not
planned and approved by FORA. By law, that responsibility and
authority lies with the land use jurisdictions (cities and
county) that will receive the property. FORA, however, does
have the responsibility to assure that all projects approved
by the land use jurisdictions are consistent with the Plan,
through a "consistency determination" process. The Plan
provides for a wide range of uses
- education, residential, visitor-serving, recreation, open
space, habitat conservation for endangered species of plant
and wildlife, retail, office, commercial and light industrial,
and areas for community service facilities. The Plan requires
improvements that must occur and mitigations for uses that
will occur - such as replacement of old infrastructure
including water and sewer systems, roads, utility and
AB 1791
Page 5
communication systems, and other infrastructure that is either
antiquated, sub-standard or both. In addition, the Plan
includes improvements to support regional transportation and
transit systems and a reclaimed water distribution network
constructed.
4)According to FORA, delay and restrictions are probably the
most important and costly factors affecting reuse of the
former Fort Ord. There is a high demand and short supply
of housing and new jobs in the Monterey Bay area. The housing
need affects all income ranges. Over the past decade, housing
prices have been steadily rising as need for housing far
exceeds the housing supply. This is true in many areas of
California, and more recently, this trend is also affecting
other areas of the United States. It is especially critical
within Monterey County and the Monterey Bay Region.
FORA states that at the same time, development-related costs
are rising for planning and site preparation, financing,
architectural design and engineering, construction,
entitlement, fees and assessments, and with various regulatory
requirements and restrictions. With prolonged delays, it
becomes more difficult to attract investors and developers to
the region. The same situation is applicable to job
availability and creation. As business costs rise, and when a
shortage of acceptable housing at reasonable prices declines,
it becomes more difficult to attract and maintain investors
and businesses in the region. FORA's goal, through the
implementation of AB 1791, is to help provide needed economic
assistance to pay for some of the costly infrastructure needs
that are one of the biggest reasons for project delays in the
Fort Ord area.
5)AB 1290 (Mello), Chapter 942, Statutes of 1993, added language
to California Redevelopment Law (CRL) to explicitly prohibit a
redevelopment agency from providing direct assistance to
specified projects within a project area, including a parcel
of land
of five acres or more that has not previously been developed for
urban use and will, when developed, generate sales tax that is
not attributed to either office, hotel, manufacturing, or
industrial uses. This section was enacted as part of the
Community Redevelopment Law Reform Act of 1993 and was
intended to prohibit redevelopment agencies from using
AB 1791
Page 6
redevelopment powers to assist automobile dealerships and
certain "big box" retailers.
The definition or lack there of, for "urban use" is what
brings FORA to the Legislature for this exemption. CRL does
not expressly define "urban use." However, case law, in
Friends of Mammoth v. Town of Mammoth Lakes Redevelopment
Agency, (2000) 82 Cal. App. 4th 511, the court said: "The term
'urban' is not fixed, objective, or easily ascertainable
(County of Riverside v. City of Murrieta (1998) 65 Cal. App.
4th 616, 623). At a minimum, however, the mere fact that
property is not vacant or is developed in accordance with its
zoning does not by itself render the property developed for
urban uses. Lands that are not vacant may be developed for
uses that are not urban uses" (Ibid., at 541). The court goes
on to say: "'Urban is defined as 'of, relating to,
characteristic of, or taking place in a city ? constituting or
including and centered on a city ? of, relating to, or
concerned with an urban and specifically a densely populated
area ? belonging or having relation to buildings that are
characteristic of cities ?' The term 'urban' thus refers more
to the location and 'varying characteristics' of a use than to
the type of use (Honey Springs Homeowners Assn. v. Board of
Supervisors (1984) 157 Cal. App. 3d 1122, 1140-1141)" (Ibid.,
at 544-545).
Thus, applying the California appeals court's definition of
"urban use," the land occupied by the former Fort Ord would
not qualify as urban use. The former Fort Ord is not
characteristic of a city - it was a military installation.
The use of the land occupied by the former Fort Ord when it
was an operating military base also is unrelated to an urban
use.
6)As mentioned above, SB 1600 (Mello, 1994) established FORA and
gave it its own set
of governing statutes specific to the needs of the former Fort
Ord and its surrounding communities. In 1996 the Legislature
passed a set of laws to govern the reuse of former
military bases in order to have a comprehensive set of codes
relating to all base closures
[AB 2736 (Weggeland), Chapter 221, Statutes of 1996]. AB 2736
also added the requirement that all military base reuse
agencies follow the provisions of CRL. The Committee may wish
to consider if the exemption that FORA is now requesting is a
AB 1791
Page 7
result
of the unintended consequences of combining two laws that were
intended to provide more clarity but in some cases caused more
confusion.
7)Support Arguments : The many local jurisdictions within FORA
state that without the ability to provide direct assistance,
their ability to extend infrastructure to all the areas
designated for commercial development is impeded. Local
jurisdictions believe that the exemption provided in AB 1791
will permit redevelopment agencies to create jobs for the
Monterey Bay Region, assist in recovery from the impacts of
the current recessionary trend, and help realize the promises
of economic sustainability in the wake of the financial
devastation inflicted by the base closure on the Monterey
area.
Opposition Arguments : Authorizing this exemption could open
the door to a slippery slope of exemptions in redevelopment
law that move past the Legislature's intended purposes
of limiting direct assistance in order to prohibit
redevelopment agencies from using redevelopment powers to
assist automobile dealerships and "big box" retailers.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Fort Ord Reuse Authority [SPONSOR]
Cities of Del Rey Oaks, Marina, Monterey, Sand City, and Seaside
County of Monterey
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958