BILL ANALYSIS
SB 684
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 19, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
SB 684 (Cogdill) - As Amended: June 22, 2009
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill caps "negative bailout" property tax allocations at
their 2010-11 levels, beginning in the 2011-12 fiscal year. It
applies to six counties (Alpine, Lassen, Mariposa, Plumas,
Stanislaus, and Trinity) that had a portion of their property
taxes shifted to school districts under legislation passed
following voter approval of Proposition 13 in 1978.
FISCAL EFFECT
A reduction of property tax allocations to school districts,
totaling $187,000 in 2001-12, $375,000 in 2012-13, and
increasing by similar amounts in subsequent years. Under
Proposition 98, the state GF will be required to backfill the
loss in property taxes to schools.
COMMENTS
1)Following voter approval of Proposition 13, which cut local
property taxes by more than 50%, the state responded with a
one-time "bailout" of local government. This included $858
million in block grants, of which $436 million went to
counties.
The following year, the Legislature adopted a longer term
bailout, by permanently restructuring the allocation of
property taxes (AB 8, L. Greene, 1979). AB 8 shifted some of
the schools' property tax revenues to local agencies and
replaced the schools' losses with increased subventions from
the state General Fund.
SB 684
Page 2
The AB 8 formula shifted additional property taxes to counties
in an amount equal to their 1978-79 block grants, plus a
portion of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)
costs not covered by the state buyout, minus the new state
grants for county health services. For six "negative bailout"
counties, the state grants for health services exceeded their
1978-79 block grants plus the adjustment for AFDC costs.
Consequently, rather than shifting additional property tax
revenue from schools to these counties, these counties shifted
property tax revenue to schools. In these six counties,
property tax revenues were reduced rather than augmented to
balance the relatively larger health and welfare payments.
2)Rationale . Supporters of the bill state that the negative
bailout allocations exacerbate fiscal pressures faced by these
counties due to state budget actions and weak economic
activity.
3)Previous legislation . The current bill is the most recent in a
long list of measures attempting to cap "negative bailout"
amounts in these six counties. SB 215 (Denham, 2007), SB 9
(Denham, 2006), SB 756 (Denham, 2003), and AB 698 (Cannella,
1996) died in the Senate Appropriations Committee, and AB 1069
(Cardoza, 1997) was held under submission by this committee.
Governor Wilson vetoed AB 472 (Cardoza, 1997), stating that
that the counties received additional fiscal relief when the
state took over trial court funding.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081