BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 178
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 19, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

                   SB 178 (Aanestad) - As Amended:  July 23, 2009 

          Policy Committee:                              Business and  
          Professions  Vote:                            11-0 (Consent)

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               

           SUMMARY  

          This bill authorizes the Department of General Services (DGS) to  
          lease, sell, or exchange a parcel of state property in Redding  
          (Shasta County). Specifically, this bill: 

          1)Authorizes the lease, sale, or exchange of a three-acre parcel  
            currently used by the Department of Forestry and Fire  
            Protection (CDF) as its Shasta-Trinity Unit Headquarters.

          2)Requires the director to retain the portion of the property  
            containing a telecommunications tower and vault unless these  
            facilities can be relocated to a suitable site.

          3)Requires the property to be offered (a) to the City of Redding  
            for use as a local government facility, and, if an agreement  
            with the city cannot be reached within 120 days, then (b) to  
            the public through a competitive process.

          4)Requires that the disposition be at not less than fair market  
            value, pursuant to an independent appraisal approved by DGS,  
            or through the competitive process.

          5)Requires DGS to be reimbursed, for costs incurred in the  
            disposition process, from the proceeds of the disposition.

          6)Stipulates that any proceeds from the disposition be used only  
            to provide substitute facilities for the Shasta-Trinity Unit  
            Headquarters.

           FISCAL EFFECT  









                                                                  SB 178
                                                                  Page  2

          1)Minor costs of around $30,000 for DGS to administer the  
            property disposition through lease, sale, or exchange,  
            reimbursed from proceeds of a property sale or from CDF in the  
            case of a lease or exchange.

          2)Any net revenue to the state from a sale of the property would  
            presumably be used to offset the costs of a replacement site  
            and facilities for a new CDF unit headquarters. DGS does not  
            have an appraised value of the property.

           COMMENTS  

           1)Purpose  . According to the author's office, the city is looking  
            for a new location for its police headquarters.  A recent  
            review of possible locations identified the state property  
            used by CDF as the most suitable because it is located  
            adjacent to City Hall and has good ingress and egress for  
            emergency situations.  The author indicates that city staff  
            has worked closely with the department to develop a strategy  
            to purchase the state property in exchange for a site approved  
            by CDF.

           2)Related Legislation  .  SB 256 (Aanestad), also on today's  
            committee agenda, authorizes DGS to sell, lease, or exchange  
            the CHP's Chico area property for a replacement facility.

           3)Prior Legislation  .  In 2008, SB 553 (Aanestad), which was  
            similar to this bill, was vetoed because it did not contain a  
            provision exempting the property disposition from the  
            California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  Such an  
            exemption is no longer necessary, however, as this issue was  
            addressed in ABX2 8 (Nestande)/Chapter 6 of 2009 for state  
            properties offered for disposition on an "as is" basis.
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081