BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 696|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 696
Author: Hueso (D)
Amended: 6/28/11 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 5-3, 6/22/11
AYES: Wolk, DeSaulnier, Hernandez, Kehoe, Liu
NOES: Huff, Fuller, La Malfa
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hancock
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-3, 8/25/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Emmerson, Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 52-24, 6/1/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic
Development
Bank Act
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires the Infrastructure and
Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) to develop criteria for
measuring the anticipated economic development benefits of
a project, and to require, as of January 1, 2013, all
projects to meet land use criteria and demonstrate economic
development benefits, as specified. This bill expands the
applicability of the requirements for projects in the
Infrastructure State Revolving Fund Program (ISRF) program
CONTINUED
AB 696
Page
2
to projects financed through all conduit financing programs
administered by the I-Bank. This bill also requires the
I-Bank to coordinate ISRF outreach and financing activities
with local and regional revolving loan funds to improve
infrastructure and small business credit markets.
ANALYSIS : Existing law establishes I-Bank within the
Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, and authorizes
it to undertake a variety of infrastructure related
financial activities including, but not limited to, the
administration of ISRF and the issuance of tax-exempt and
taxable revenue bonds.
This bill requires the California I-Bank to do the
following:
Develop a methodology and process for measuring the
economic development benefits of projects funded through
the I-Bank.
Limit assistance, beginning January 1, 2013, to projects
that meet land use criteria and demonstrate economic
development benefits, including creation or retention of
jobs, growth of sales tax revenues, or growth of the
property tax base.
Expand the applicability of requirements for ISRF
projects to all projects financed by conduit financing
programs at the I-Bank.
Consult with local and regional revolving loan funds and
networks of revolving loan funds to improve the
infrastructure and small business credit markets, as
specified. The I-Bank could also coordinate
implementation of its revolving loan fund with these
entities for those purposes.
Comments
In its 2008-09 analysis of the state budget, the
Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) raised concerns over the
projects being funded under the ISRF Program. The LAO
noted that the current scoring system does not effectively
target funds to projects that provide economic development
AB 696
Page
3
and promote better land use. Specifically, a review of
approved ISRF loans indicates (a) the majority of projects
that received loans have little or no economic development
impact; and ( b) projects do not need to have much impact
on improving land use to receive loan funds. This bill
addresses these concerns by prohibiting ISRF moneys to be
used for projects that do not meet certain economic
development and land use criteria.
Related Legislation
AB 700 (Blumenfield), 2011-12 Session, requires the I-Bank
to adopt two-year goals and measurable objectives,
consistent with state infrastructure, economic development
and environmental plans, and authorizes the I-Bank to
pursue streamlined administrative functions.
AB 893 (V. Manuel P�rez), 2011-12 Session, directs the
I-Bank to enhance outreach and technical assistance to
small and rural communities to obtain financing for
infrastructure projects
AB 1094 (John A. P�rez), 2011-12 Session, expands the
I-Bank's board from five to seven members, and establishes
the I-Bank as the primary state agency to secure funding
through any federal infrastructure financing authority.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13
2013-14 Fund
Develop methodology $100 Special*
Project evaluation Unknown,
potentially $100-$300 Special*
annually
Consultation & Unknown
costs to consult with other Special*
coordination revolving loan funds
AB 696
Page
4
* California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank
Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/29/11)
California Association for Local Economic Development
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley,
Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter,
Cedillo, Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong,
Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Gatto, Gordon, Hall,
Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman,
Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning,
Pan, Perea, Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torres, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly, Fletcher,
Beth Gaines, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Jones,
Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Miller, Morrell, Nestande,
Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Silva, Smyth, Valadao, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Garrick, Gorell, Jeffries, V. Manuel
P�rez
AGB:do 8/29/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****