BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 586|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 586
          Author:   Yee (D)
          Amended:  5/6/09
          Vote:     27 - Urgency

           
           SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORG. COMMITTEE  :  11-1, 4/14/09
          AYES:  Wright, Benoit, Calderon, Denham, Florez, Oropeza,  
            Padilla, Romero, Wiggins, Wyland, Yee
          NOES:  Harman
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Negrete McLeod

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  13-0, 5/26/09
          AYES:  Kehoe, Cox, Corbett, Denham, DeSaulnier, Hancock,  
            Leno, Oropeza, Runner, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee


           SUBJECT  :    State property:  sale

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill directs the Department of General  
          Services, in consultation with the Department of Food and  
          Agriculture, to enter into negotiations to sell to any  
          interested party, at fair market value, with certain  
          restrictions, a 13-acre parking lot portion of the  
          state-owned Cow Palace property, located in the County of  
          San Mateo and the City and County of San Francisco. 

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law generally requires the Director  
          of the Department of General Services (DGS) to perform  
          various functions with respect to state property and  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          2

          provides for the sale, lease, or transfer of surplus state  
          property.  

          Existing law requires the DGS Director to request  
          authorization by the Legislature prior to the disposition  
          by sale or otherwise of state land reported to it by a  
          state agency as being in excess of its foreseeable needs.   
          Each state agency is required to annually review  
          proprietary state lands under its jurisdiction to determine  
          what lands are in excess of the agency's foreseeable needs  
          and to report to DGS.
            
          Existing law provides criteria for state agencies to use in  
          determining and reporting to DGS lands in excess of the  
          agency's foreseeable needs.  Under existing law, DGS is  
          responsible for determining if surplus land is needed by  
          any other state agency.  

          Existing law requires surplus state property to be offered  
          to local entities for the purposes of low and moderate  
          income housing; parks, recreational or open space; school  
          facilities; enterprise zones; and infill development within  
          transit village areas.

          Existing law specifies that the Legislature may authorize a  
          particular surplus property be sold at less than fair  
          market value and provides that 30 days prior to executing  
          such a transaction, DGS must report to the chairs of the  
          fiscal committees of the Legislature the following  
          information:  (1) the financial terms of the transaction,  
          (2) a comparison of fair market value for the property and  
          financial terms, and (3) the basis for agreeing to terms  
          and conditions other than fair market value. 

          Existing law, Section 11011 (k) (1) and (2) of the  
          Government Code, contains provisions exempting the sale of  
          surplus property from designated provisions of the  
          California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).    
          Specifically, the law provides that any disposition of  a  
          parcel of surplus property made on an "as-is" shall be  
          exempt from statutory requirements of CEQA, however, the  
          law makes it explicit that the buyer or transferee of a  
          parcel shall be subject to any local governmental  
          entitlement or land use approval requirements and CEQA.







                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          3


          Furthermore, existing law provides that if any transaction  
          is not on an "as-is" basis sale and close of escrow is  
          contingent on satisfying any local governmental approvals  
          for entitlement or land use requirements, including  
          compliance by the local government with CEQA, then the  
          execution of the purchase and sale agreement or exchange  
          agreement is exempt from CEQA.
           
          California's network of fairs includes 54 district  
          agricultural associations, state agency fairs, which are  
          managed under the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA)  
          within the Division of Fairs and Expositions.  Each fair  
          operates with a degree of autonomy with a board of  
          directors appointed by the governor and in accordance with  
          state law governing the operation of state agencies.  Prior  
          to the passage of the 2009-10 budget in February which  
          changed the funding structure for fairs, for 75 years,  
          license fees assessed against California horseracing had  
          been the sole state support for the California Network of  
          Fairs through the Fair and Exposition Fund.  Current law  
          provides the Fair and Exposition Fund will receive $32  
          million annually from the General Fund.
           
           Proposition 60A of November 2004, SCA 18 (Johnson),  
          Resolution Chapter 103, Statutes of 2004, which was adopted  
          by the electorate (73 percent margin) requires, among other  
          things, that the proceeds from the sale of surplus state  
          property, with specified exceptions, be used to pay the  
          principal and interest on the Economic Recovery Bond Act of  
          2004.

          This bill:

          1. Requires DGS, in consultation with DFA, prior to an  
             unspecified date, to enter into negotiations to sell the  
             specified property at fair market value, without any  
             conditions relating to entitlement, to any interested  
             party upon terms and conditions deemed to be in the  
             state's best interests.    

          2. Makes it explicit that DGS shall not sell the real  
             property for less than fair market value and specifies  
             that fair market value shall be evaluated at the highest  







                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          4

             and best use of the property as entitled within its  
             existing zone designation.

          3. Stipulates that the sales agreement must require the  
             purchaser to develop the property for uses consistent  
             with the general plan of the City of Daly City and the  
             Bayshore Revitalization Redevelopment Plan.

          4. Provides that DGS shall be reimbursed from the sale  
             proceeds for any costs or expenses incurred in the  
             disposition of the property and requires that the net  
             proceeds received from the disposition of the property  
             be paid into the Fair and Exposition Fund for the  
             benefit of the District 1-A Agricultural Association  
             (Cow Palace).

          5. Provides that DFA, until an unspecified date, shall  
             assume only the rights, duties, and powers of the board  
             of directors of the District 1-A Agricultural  
             Association affiliated with negotiating the sale of the  
             property.  

          6. Declares that the sale of this property does not  
             constitute a sale of surplus state property as set forth  
             in Section 9 of Article III (Proposition 60 of 2004) of  
             the California Constitution or subdivision (g) of  
             Section 11011 of the Government Code relating to the  
             Deficit Recovery Bond Retirement Sinking Fund  
             Subaccount.   

           Background

          CEQA exemption  .  The ability to get excess properties  
          declared surplus by the Legislature has been impeded these  
          past few years by a disagreement between the Legislature  
          and the Administration regarding the removal of a statutory  
          exemption for the state's surplus properties from the  
          requirements of CEQA.  This disagreement has at least for  
          now been resolved with enactment of AB 8XX (Nestande),  
          Chapter 6, Statutes of 2009-10, Second Extraordinary  
          Session, that places within the Government Code an ongoing  
          CEQA exemption for all properties declared surplus by the  
          Legislature.  The CEQA exemption language contained in SB  
          586 mirrors the language in AB 8XX. 







                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          5


           Prior Legislation

           A similar bill, SB 1527 (Yee), 2007-08 Session, passed the  
          Senate Floor with a vote of 27-9 on July 14, 2008, but was  
          vetoed by the Governor with the following message:

            "This bill requires the Director of General Services to  
            enter into negotiations to sell a 13 acre parcel at the  
            Cow Palace to any interested third party, with the Daly  
            City Redevelopment Agency having the first right of  
            refusal.

            "SB 1527 circumvents the state's current competitive bid  
            process and would potentially limit the state's financial  
            return for the sale of state owned land without creating  
            any added value for the surrounding community.  By  
            including the first right of refusal provisions, this  
            bill narrows the range of options for the use of the  
            property and places the state at risk to receive less  
            revenue than if the property was offered to all  
            interested parties through a normal competitive bid  
            process."

          This bill does not contain the provisions to which the  
          Governor objected.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  Yes   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

                          Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

             Major Provisions                2009-10     2010-11     
             2011-12               Fund  

            Sale of state property        Unknown revenue increase  
            one time                      Special*

             *   Fair and Exposition Fund (assumes the parcel was  
              initially acquired with moneys from this fund;  
              otherwise, the revenue from the sale would be  
              deposited in the Deficit Recovery Bond Retirement  







                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          6

              Sinking Fund Subaccount pursuant to Proposition 60A.   
              Reimbursement from the net proceeds of the sale of  
              any DGS costs incurred in the disposition of the  
              property would be made.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/28/09)

          City of Daly City
          Daly City Redevelopment Agency

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  5/28/09)

          Western Fairs Association

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office,  
          this bill is intended to allow the state to negotiate with  
          any interested buyer to sell a 13-acre parcel within the  
          Cow Palace property in order to bring needed economic  
          development to the neighborhood surrounding the Cow Palace  
          and to renovate and improve the antiquated Cow Palace  
          building.  

          Specifically, this bill requires the state to enter into  
          negotiations to sell, at fair market value, to any  
          interested party, approximately 13 acres of the Cow  
          Palace's parking lot, as specified.  The author's office  
          emphasis that selling this portion of the Cow Palace  
          property will provide much needed development in the  
          Bayshore Community.

          According to the author's office, the Bayshore Community in  
          Daly City is in desperate need of basic services.  This  
          neighborhood does not have a post office, pharmacy or  
          grocery store.  Some residents living near the Cow Palace  
          must take three buses to get to the closest grocery store.   
          The Cow Palace property occupies 68 acres within this  
          neighborhood, including a 13-acre overflow parking lot that  
          is rarely used. 

          The author's office states that the Cow Palace is currently  
          running an operating deficit of nearly $700,000, and over  
          the past five years the Cow Palace has lost over $1.5  
          million dollars.  During this period of time, the Fair and  
          Exposition Fund has been tapped to help close the Cow  







                                                                SB 586
                                                                Page  
          7

          Palace's debt.  As recently as 2007, the Daly City  
          Redevelopment Agency offered to enter into a long-term  
          ground lease for approximately 13 acres of Cow Palace  
          property.  The author's office notes that the Redevelopment  
          Agency offered a minimum base rent of $1.4 million, which  
          represented a fair market rent, however, the Cow Palace  
          Board rejected the offer and discussions ended without a  
          ground lease and without improved revenue to the Cow  
          Palace. 

          The author's office points out that this bill provides for  
          the disposition of the overflow parking lot, at fair market  
          value, with the proceeds going to the Fair and Exposition  
          Fund because monies that were expended to initially  
          purchase the parking lot parcel were derived from the Fair  
          and Exposition Fund.  The author's office contends that the  
          proposed sale of the 13 acres will generate approximately  
          $20-$21 million dollars in revenue for the state.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    Writing in opposition, the  
          Western Fairs Association indicates that this bill is  
          unnecessary and premature due to the fact that community  
          needs are already being addressed by the Cow Palace Board  
          which has begun a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to  
          develop the 13 acres of the Cow Palace property referenced  
          in this bill.  The Western Fairs Association contends that  
          the RFP process should be fully vetted by the Board before  
          the Legislature decides to override and abandon the  
          process.  
           

          TSM:mw  5/28/09   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****