BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1943
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1943 (Chesbro)
          As Amended  March 24, 2014
          2/3 vote 

           LOCAL GOVERNMENT    9-0         APPROPRIATIONS      15-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, Alejo, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow,           |
          |     |Bradford, Gordon,         |     |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian  |
          |     |Melendez, Mullin, Rendon, |     |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
          |     |Waldron                   |     |Gomez, Holden, Linder,    |
          |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner,    |
          |     |                          |     |Weber                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
          SUMMARY  :  Revises the statutory obligation for the City of  
          Eureka (City) to remit certain funds to the state related to  
          tidelands and submerged lands located in Humboldt Bay that were  
          granted to the City in the 1970s.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Deletes the statutory obligation that requires the City to  
            remit to the Controller, annually, a sum not less than 15% of  
            the amount of money deposited by the city into the Humboldt  
            Bay Fund during the preceding fiscal year as a condition of a  
            $750,000 loan made to the City by the state in 1970.

          2)Requires, on June 30, 2015, and at the end of every fiscal  
            year thereafter, 4% of all gross revenue generated from the  
            trust lands, to be transmitted to the State Lands Commission  
            (Commission) and deposited in the Kapiloff Land Bank Fund for  
            expenditure by the Commission for management of the  
            Commission's granted lands program.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Grants to the City all the right, title, and interest of the  
            State of California in and to certain tidelands and submerged  
            lands located in Humboldt Bay in trust for specified purposes.

          2)Requires the City to establish the Humboldt Bay Fund and to  
            deposit all moneys received directly from, or indirectly  
            attributable to, the tide and submerged lands into the Humbolt  








                                                                  AB 1943
                                                                  Page  2


            Bay Fund.

          3)Requires the City, prior to June 30 of each year, to pay to  
            the State Controller at least 15% of the money deposited by  
            the city in the Humboldt Bay Fund during the preceding fiscal  
            year as a condition of a $750,000 loan made to the City by the  
            state in 1970.

          4)Establishes the Kapiloff Land Bank Act (Act) of 1982, for the  
            purpose of facilitating public trust settlements and  
            mitigation projects.

          5)Creates the Land Bank Fund and continuously appropriates  
            moneys in the fund subject to a statutory trust to the State  
            Lands Commission, acting as the Land Bank Trustee, to acquire  
            real property or any interest in real property for the  
            purposes of public trust title settlements and for mitigation  
            of adverse environmental impacts.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, there are minor costs to the General Fund in the  
          range of $30,000 to $60,000 annually; minor increases to the  
          Land Bank Fund in the range of $8,000 to $16,000 annually.

          The Kapiloff Land Bank Fund is continuously appropriated to the  
          State Lands Commission.  By requiring the deposit of revenues in  
          the Land Bank Fund, this bill makes an appropriation.

           COMMENTS  :   

          1)Purpose of this bill.  This bill revises the statutory  
            obligation for the City to remit certain funds to the state  
            related to tidelands and submerged lands located in Humboldt  
            Bay that were granted to the City in the 1970.  The bill  
            deletes the annual requirement for the City to remit a sum not  
            less than 15% of the amount of money deposited by the City  
            into the Humboldt Bay Fund, during the preceding fiscal year,  
            and instead, requires annual remittance by the City of 4% of  
            all gross revenue generated from the trust lands to the State  
            Lands Commission, to be deposited in the Kapiloff Land Bank  
            Fund.  This bill is sponsored by the City of Eureka.

          2)Background on lawsuit and loan to the City of Eureka.  In  
            1970, the City initiated a lawsuit to protect a state grant of  








                                                                  AB 1943
                                                                  Page  3


            sovereign tide and submerged lands at the edge of the City and  
            Humboldt Bay from private encroachment.  The grant was  
            intended to assist the City in its redevelopment efforts and  
            conferred management and control responsibilities to the City.  
             In subsequent years, the City found that it could no longer  
            financially support the lawsuit.  Because the State Lands  
            Commission found that defense of the litigation was essential  
            to statewide public trust interests, and because it would be  
            more expensive for the state to enter into its own litigation  
            to protect those interests, the state entered into a unique  
            agreement to loan the city up to $750,000 to continue the  
            litigation.
             
             In making the loan, the Legislature found that it would  
            provide significant fiscal and time savings to the state,  
            since the City would continue to pursue litigation that the  
            state would otherwise be forced to take on.  In return for the  
            loan, the City agreed to undergo very strenuous grant  
            oversight in a number of ways, including audits of its books  
            and oversight of leases of the granted lands.
             
           3)Statutory repayment provisions of the loan.  The statutes  
            dealing with repayment of the $750,000 loan do not include  
            provisions for ending the City's payment obligations.   
            Instead, they require the City to pay to the State Controller,  
            in perpetuity, at least 15% funds deposited in the Humboldt  
            Bay Fund on an annual basis. 

          4)Kapiloff Land Bank Act.  The Act was introduced by Assembly  
            Member Lawrence Kapiloff and enacted by the Legislature in  
            1982.  The Act is an extension of State Lands Commission  
            authority as set forth in Public Resources Code Section 6307,  
            which was enacted to facilitate settlements of title to real  
            property with cash payments where exchange parcels are not  
            readily available or are not of equal value and to facilitate  
            mitigation through the pooling of such payments.  The  
            Commission holds and administers the acquired lands as  
            sovereign lands of the legal character of tidelands and  
            submerged lands.

          5)Author's statement.  According to the author:
               The City of Eureka has paid back the initial loan to  
               the state and then some.  To date the city has repaid  
               $1,167,000 on an $800,000 loan.  The loan has greatly  








                                                                  AB 1943
                                                                  Page  4


               helped the City but the Harbor [Humboldt Bay Harbor]  
               continues to operate at a deficit, with a projected  
               operating deficit of $122,748 for fiscal year 2013-14,  
               further lowering the unrestricted fund balance deficit  
               to over $800,000.  Additionally, the dissolution of  
               the Eureka Redevelopment Agency has saddled the  
               successor agency's continued repayment of Harbor bonds  
               which amount to about $100,000 per year, further  
               impacting the Harbor Fund's deficit, and reducing its  
               ability to become an economically viable proprietary  
               fund.

               Removing the requirement for payment to the state will  
               allow the City of Eureka to place all of its tideland  
               resources into operating and maintaining its tideland  
               facilities, which will in turn help the City achieve  
               the state's goals for Public Trust Tidelands, as well  
               as helping spur local economic development.

          6)Previous legislation.  There have been several previous  
            attempts to modify the loan repayment provisions, including  
            the following bills:
             
             SB 1126 (Chesbro) of 2006. This bill would have allowed the  
            Humboldt Bay Harbor District to transfer the loan obligations  
            from a 1970 loan (that was refinanced in 1982) to a special  
            sub-account in house.  The bill was vetoed by Governor  
            Schwarzenegger who noted in his veto message that "this bill  
            is contrary to the original agreement memorialized in Chapter  
            1095, Statutes of 1978, which specified that the grant was  
            contingent upon Eureka's agreement to make an annual  
            remittance to the State in perpetuity."  Governor  
            Schwarzenegger also wrote in his veto message that revenue  
            reduction was not prudent at that time, given the state's  
            fiscal condition.

            SB 742 (Chesbro) of 2005.  This bill would have ended the 1970  
            loan agreement to the City of Eureka that was renegotiated in  
            1982.  The veto message was substantially similar to the veto  
            message for SB 1126.

          7)Continuous appropriation.  The bill requires a two-thirds vote  
            of each house because of the continuous appropriation.









                                                                  AB 1943
                                                                  Page  5


          8)Arguments in support.  The City argues that this bill will  
            acknowledge Eureka's repayment to the state but still require  
            a reduced payment of 4% of the Harbor Fund revenues with no  
            end date.

          9)Arguments in opposition.  None on file.

           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)  
          319-3958 


                                                                FN: 0003281