BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 1398
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 4, 2010

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                  SB 1398 (DeSaulnier) - As Amended:  June 1, 2010 

          Policy Committee:                             Local  
          GovernmentVote:5-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              Yes

           SUMMARY  

          This bill reallocates property taxes attributable to a new  
          public utility power plant in Contra Costa County from the City  
          of Oakley and most non-enterprise special districts in the  
          county to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency.  The bill also:

          1)Allocates 2% of the property tax revenues to the East Contra  
            Costa Fire Protection District ($130,000 more than under  
            existing law).

          2)Exempts the taxes reallocated to the redevelopment agency from  
            pass-through agreements to other affected jurisdictions, and  
            from the existing-law requirement for the agency to set aside  
            20% of the new proceeds for low- and moderate-income housing.

          3)Requires the Oakley Redevelopment Agency to reimburse the  
            County Auditor for reasonable costs related to the  
            reallocations required by this bill.

           FISCAL EFFECT
           
          1)No direct effect on state costs or revenues, since the bill  
            does not impact property taxes going to school districts.

          2)The bill redirects about $2.7 million of property taxes within  
            the county, and reduces funds that would otherwise be  
            available for low income housing. Of this total, $500,000  
            would be from the City of Oakley (where the redevelopment  
            agency is located) and $2.2 million from various water,  
            sanitary, park, hospital, and other special districts within  
            Contra Costa County.








                                                                  SB 1398
                                                                  Page  2


          3)Exemption from 20% low income housing set-aside would reduce  
            funding for low and moderate income housing by about $500,000  
            per year.

          4)The bill contains a provision stating that it will reimburse  
            the county for mandated costs determined by the Commission on  
            State Mandates. These costs would be for the added property  
            tax computations required of the County Auditor. However,  
            actual state reimbursements are unlikely, since the bill  
            requires the redevelopment agency to reimburse the county for  
            reasonable expenses related to the reallocations. 




           COMMENTS  :

           1)Background - property tax allocations of utilities  .  The  
            California Constitution requires the State Board of  
            Equalization (BOE) to assess public utilities for property tax  
            purposes.  The BOE allocates the assessed value of combined  
            utility property among the counties based on the amount of  
            property the utility owns in each county.  Within each county,  
            state law prescribes a method for allocating the taxes, where  
            property tax growth placed in a county-wide pool and then  
            distributed to each local taxing agency (cities, county,  
            special districts, and school districts) based on their  
            historical share of overall property taxes, regardless of  
            whether the utility is located within the agency's boundaries.

            In recognition of the need to rapidly expand the state's  
            electrical generating capacity, and the impact that new  
            generating facilities have on local communities, the  
            Legislature enacted SB 1317 (Torlakson), Chapter 872/2006, to  
            compensate communities that accept energy projects with a  
            bigger share of property tax revenues attributable to the  
            project. However, that law only compensates cities or  
            counties, not redevelopment agencies.

           2)Background - low and moderate income housing  . Existing law  
            requires that not less than 20% of all property tax increment  
            allocated to a redevelopment agency to be used by the agency  
            for purposes of increasing, improving, and preserving the  
            community's supply of housing available to low and moderate  








                                                                  SB 1398
                                                                  Page  3

            income households.

           3)Rationale  . The California Energy Commission is considering a  
            proposal to construct a 600 megawatt power plant to be located  
            within a redevelopment project area in the City of Oakley  
            (Contra Costa County). Oakley officials claim that the  
            modified allocation method created by the SB 1317 allocates  
            insufficient revenues to their redevelopment project area.   
            This bill creates an exception to current allocation method  
            for the purpose of sending more property tax revenues to the  
            Oakley Redevelopment Agency. According to the author, current  
            law creates a disincentive for the City of Oakley to support a  
            new power generating facility within its boundaries.  

           4)Opposition.   The California Special Districts Association  
            (CSDA) opposes the bill, indicating that the incentives  
            provided in existing law for power plant siting are adequate,  
            and that inclusion of redevelopment agencies "sets an  
            unfortunate precedent and will ultimately result in reducing  
            or otherwise eliminating property tax allocations to special  
            districts as provided for in SB 1317."


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081