BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: sb 562
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: T&H Com.
VERSION: 3/29/11
Analysis by: Mark Stivers FISCAL: YES
Hearing date: April 12, 2011
SUBJECT:
2011 housing omnibus bill
DESCRIPTION:
This bill makes non-controversial changes to sections of law
relating to housing.
ANALYSIS:
According to the Legislative Analyst, the cost of producing a
bill in 2001-02 was $17,890. By combining multiple matters into
one bill, the Legislature can make minor changes to law in the
most cost-effective manner.
This bill includes the following provisions. The sponsor of
each provision is noted in brackets.
1. CDLAC cleanup �Section 1]. The California Debt Limit
Allocation Committee (CDLAC) administers the tax-exempt private
activity bond program for the state. Current law states that if
a bond issuer that received a private activity bond allocation
from CDLAC ultimately issues bonds in an amount less than what
was awarded by CDLAC, then a proportional share of a performance
deposit held for that issuance shall be forfeited to CDLAC. The
intent of the performance deposit is to insure that bond issuers
make use of the limitedly available private activity bond
allocation awarded to them for a given project or program. The
reality of project finance is that the funding sources are often
in-flux up to the day of bond issuance, so bond issuers will
often apply to CDLAC for an allocation amount slightly above
what they believe at the time they may eventually need. This
slight difference is the industry norm and reduces the need for
the bond issuer to reapply to CDLAC for small amounts of
additional allocation if needed. Historically, CDLAC's policy
has been that if the issuance amount was at least 80% of the
awarded allocation amount, then no portion of the performance
SB 562 (TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING COMMITTEE) Page 2
deposit would be forfeited. The amendments revise statute to
reflect this past CDLAC practice.
CDLAC also seeks to clarify its option to waive the forfeiture
of the performance deposit when some portion of the bonds have
been issued if the committee should determine there is good
cause to do so. Existing statute only provides for this
discretion when none of the bonds have been issued. This
creates a situation where an applicant may be able to have its
performance deposit returned if no bonds are issued but cannot
have it returned if a portion of the bonds are issued. The
amendments provide CDLAC with the ability to return the deposit
when less than 100% of the allocation amount is issued but not
when no bonds are issued. �Diane Stanton, State Treasurer's
Office]
2. Manufactured Home Recovery Fund �Section 2]. Legislative
amendments in 2004 expanded the ability of aggrieved buyers and
sellers of manufactured homes to file claims and simplified some
processes, and the current economy has created additional
purchase and sales problems. Currently, there is roughly
$800,000 in the Manufactured Home Recovery Fund but roughly the
same amount of pending claims. When the fund runs low on cash,
it reduces the timeliness of potential payments when claims are
found to be valid and has a spiraling effect on even later
claims. Current law that has been in place for 30 years,
however, allows for a reduction in the fee whenever the balance
exceeds $1 million. The amendments increase the threshold at
which fees may be reduced from $1 million to $2 million. �Mark
Stivers, Senate Transportation and Housing Committee]
3. Mobilehome Parks Act cleanup �Sections 3, 4, and 5]. The
Mobilehome Parks Act governs health and safety issues in
mobilehome parks. The act includes an outdated term that is no
longer used: commercial coach. The modern term is commercial
modular. The amendments update the definitions in the act to
reflect this modern term. �Deborah Gore, Department of Housing
and Community Development]
4. Special Occupancy Parks Act cross reference �Section 6].
Current law makes various violations of the Special Occupancy
Parks Act a misdemeanor. When issuing a citation, an
enforcement agency must include a statement about the relevant
penalties. Current statute contains an incorrect
cross-reference to the existing penalty section. The amendments
corrects this cross-reference. �Deborah Gore, Department of
SB 562 (TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING COMMITTEE) Page 3
Housing and Community Development]
5. Repeal outdated statute on Redding Veterans' Home �Section
7]. Current law allows redevelopment agencies in Shasta County
to borrow and use up to $2,300,000 from their Low and Moderate
Income Housing Funds to provide financial assistance for the
acquisition of property for a veterans home in the City of
Redding. This land has been purchased with non-redevelopment
funds, and the home is currently under construction. This
section is no longer needed. The amendments repeal this
obsolete section of law. �Peter Detwiler, Senate Local
Government Committee]
6. Seismic Safety Retrofits �Section 8]. Current law dealing
with seismic safety retrofit rehabilitation or alternations
relies on building code references no longer adopted in
California. The amendments update the requirements to refer to
current building codes in use in California. �Mark Stivers,
Senate Transportation and Housing Committee]
7. Strong Motion Instrumentation Fee cleanup �Sections 9 and
10]. Current law requires each applicant for a building permit
to pay a minimal fee (1/100th or 2/100th of a percent of the
value of the work) to support earthquake mapping work. Two
separate sections of law require that these fee revenues be
deposited into the Strong-Motion Instrumentation and Seismic
Hazards Mapping Fund. The amendments combine these two
repetitive sections into one. �Mark Stivers, Senate
Transportation and Housing Committee]
SB 562 (TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING COMMITTEE) Page 4
COMMENTS:
Purpose of the bill . The Senate Transportation and Housing
Committee is authoring this bill as a means of combining
multiple, non-controversial changes to statutes into one bill,
so that the Legislature can make minor amendments in a
cost-effective manner. There is no known opposition to any item
in the bill, and if concerns arise that cannot be resolved, the
provision of concern will be deleted from the bill.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday, April 6,
2011)
SUPPORT: None received.
OPPOSED: None received.