BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 25, 2014

                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
                           K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, Chair
                      SB 614 (Wolk) - As Amended:  June 16, 2014

           SENATE VOTE  :  Vote not relevant
           
          SUBJECT  :  Local government: jurisdictional changes:  
          infrastructure financing.

           SUMMARY :  Allows a local agency to use tax increment financing  
          in a newly formed or reorganized district to fund infrastructure  
          improvements in disadvantaged unincorporated communities.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :   

          1)Allows a local agency to include in its resolution of an  
            application for change of organization or reorganization a tax  
            increment financing plan to improve or upgrade infrastructure  
            in a disadvantaged unincorporated community through the  
            formation or reorganization of a special district.  

          2)Allows a local agency formation commission (LAFCO) to amend  
            the proposal for a change of organization or reorganization,  
            if a local agency includes a plan pursuant to 1), above, to  
            include the formation of a special district or reorganization  
            of a special district with the consent of the special  
            district.  

          3)Specifies that the district can be, but are not limited to, a  
            community services district, municipal water district, or  
            sanitary district to provide financing to improve or upgrade  
            structures, roads, sewer, water facilities, or other  
            infrastructure needs to serve a disadvantaged unincorporated  
            community.  

          4)Requires the formation of a special district to be in  
            conformity with the requirements of the principal act of the  
            proposed district and all required formation proceedings.  

          5)Provides that nothing in this section precludes a LAFCO from  
            considering any other options or exercising its powers as  
            defined in existing law.  

          6)Allows a local agency's plan for financing services that is  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  2

            included in the petition for a change of organization,  
            consented to by each affected agency, to include a tax  
            increment financing plan, pursuant to the authority granted by  
            this bill.  

          7)Authorizes the local agency that files the resolution of  
            application for a change of organization or reorganization,  
            and one or more other local agencies that will improve or  
            upgrade structures to serve a disadvantaged unincorporated  
            community, to agree on a plan for financing services and  
            structures.  

          8)Authorizes the plan to contain a provision that taxes levied  
            upon taxable property in the area included within the  
            territory each year by or for the benefit of the local agency  
            and one or more other local agencies that consent to the plan,  
            be divided as follows:

             a)   Requires that portion of the taxes that would have been  
               produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year  
               by or for each affected local agency, prior to the  
               effective date of the certification of completion, and that  
               portion of taxes by or for each school entity is allocated  
               to the respective affected local agencies and school  
               entities as taxes by or for the affected local agencies and  
               school entities on all property paid; and,  

             b)   Requires that portion of levied taxes each year  
               specified in the adopted infrastructure financing plan for  
               the city and each affected taxing entity that has agreed to  
               participate, in excess of the amount specified in a),  
               above, is allocated into a special fund of a special  
               district formed or reorganized to finance the  
               infrastructure improvements to serve the disadvantaged  
               unincorporated community.  

          9)Requires the plan to specify a date upon which the division of  
            taxes described in 8), above, shall terminate.  

          10)Allows the plan to include a provision for the issuance of  
            indebtedness.  Requires any indebtedness to be issued in  
            conformity with current law which governs the issuance of  
            general obligation bonds for local agencies or the principal  
            act of the special district.  









                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  3

          11)Prohibits any plan adopted pursuant to this bill to result in  
            the reduction of property tax revenues allocated to any school  
            entity as defined by current law.  

          12)Defines terms as follows:

             a)   "Local agency" to mean a city, county, and special  
               district;  

             b)   "Affected local agency" to mean a local agency that has  
               adopted a resolution of its governing board consenting to  
               the plan developed pursuant to this bill;  

             c)   "Territory" to mean all or part of the land that is  
               included in the petition for change of organization or  
               reorganization filed by the local agency;  

             d)   "Certificate of completion" to mean "the document  
               prepared by the [LAFCO] executive officer and recorded with  
               the county recorder that confirms the final successful  
               completion of a change of organization or reorganization";  
               and,  

             e)   "Disadvantaged unincorporated community" to mean  
               inhabited territory with 12 or more registered voters, or  
               as determined by LAFCO policy, that constitutes all or a  
               portion of a disadvantaged community, which is defined in  
               the Water Code to mean "a community with an annual median  
               household income that is less than 80% of the statewide  
               annual median household income."

          13)States that it is the intent of the Legislature to provide  
            additional options for financing infrastructure that can be  
            incorporated into the approval of an annexation of a  
            disadvantaged, unincorporated community.   

          14)Makes other technical and conforming changes.  


           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Establishes the procedures for the organization and  
            reorganization of cities, counties, 
          and special districts under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local  
            Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act).  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  4


          2)Requires a local agency, when submitting an application for a  
            change of organization or reorganization, to include a plan  
            for providing services within the affected territory, as  
            follows:

             a)   Description of the services, including the level and  
               range of those services, to be extended to the affected  
               territory;  

             b)   Indication of when those services can feasibly be  
               extended to the affected territory;  

             c)   Indication of any improvement or upgrading of structure,  
               roads, sewer or water facilities, or other conditions the  
               local agency would impose or require within the affected  
               agency if the change of organization or reorganization is  
               completed; and,

             d)   Information as to how the services will be financed. 

          1)Prohibits, in specified circumstances, a LAFCO from approving  
            an annexation to a city 
          of any territory greater than 10 acres, or as determined by  
            LAFCO policy, where there exists a disadvantaged  
            unincorporated community that is contiguous to the area of  
            proposed annexation, unless an application to annex the  
            disadvantaged unincorporated community to the subject city has  
            been filed with the executive officer.

          2)Requires the LAFCO, in determining the sphere of influence of  
            each local agency and in the written statement of its  
            determinations for a municipal service review, to include  
            specified information regarding disadvantaged unincorporated  
            communities, beginning on or after 
          July 1, 2012.

          3)Authorizes cities and counties to create infrastructure  
            financing districts (IFDs) and issue bonds to pay for  
            community scale public works:  highways, transit, water  
            systems, sewer projects, flood control, child care facilities,  
            libraries, parks, and solid waste facilities.

          4)Allows an IFD to divert property tax increment revenues from  
            other local governments, excluding school districts, for up to  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  5

            30 years, in order to pay back bonds issued by the IFD.

          5)Requires that in order to form an IFD a city or county must  
            develop an infrastructure plan, send copies to every  
            landowner, consult with other local governments, and hold a  
            public hearing.

          6)Requires a two-thirds voter approval of the formation of the  
            IFD and the issuance of bonds, and requires majority voter  
            approval for setting the IFD's appropriations limits.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  None


           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Purpose of this bill  .  This bill adds new provisions within  
            the change of organization or reorganization process in the  
            CKH Act that require a local agency to submit a plan for  
            providing services and how those services will be financed.   
            This bill allows a local agency to include in resolution of  
            application a plan to use tax increment financing in a new or  
            reorganized special district to provide infrastructure in a  
            disadvantaged unincorporated community.  This bill is  
            permissive and allows the affected agencies to agree to  
            utilize tax increment financing.  

            The bill includes the tax increment allocation established in  
            existing IFD law, but relies on requirements in the CKH Act  
            for a change of organization or reorganization for  
            notification, hearings, protest, and overall voter  
            involvement.  The availability of tax increment financing  
            under this bill is limited to proposals for a change of  
            organization or reorganization by a local agency that will  
            create or reorganize a special district in order to provide  
            infrastructure to a disadvantaged unincorporated community,  
            which may include improving or upgrading structures, roads,  
            sewer, water facilities, or other infrastructure needs.  This  
            bill is author-sponsored.  

           2)Background on disadvantaged unincorporated communities  .  SB  
            244 (Wolk), Chapter 513, Statutes of 2011, took a two-pronged  
            approach in establishing new requirements for local officials  
            to consider disadvantaged communities.  First, SB 244  
            established a process for the identification of service  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  6

            deficiencies in disadvantaged communities through the LAFCO  
            planning process, therefore adding new duties to LAFCOs in the  
            preparation of MSRs and when reviewing and updating a city or  
            a special district's sphere of influence, starting after July  
            1, 2012.  Second, SB 244 required each city or county to  
            update the land use element 
          of its general plan to address the presence of these types of  
            communities, and for each identified community, the city or  
            county is required to do an analysis of water, wastewater,  
            stormwater drainage, and structural fire protection needs or  
            deficiencies.  SB 244 also prohibits a LAFCO, in specified  
            circumstances, from approving an annexation to a city 
          of any territory greater than 10 acres where there exists a  
            disadvantaged inhabited community that is contiguous to the  
            area of proposed annexation, unless the annexation application  
            includes a separate application to annex the disadvantaged  
            unincorporated inhabited territory to the subject city.  

           3)Author's statement  .  The author notes that, "According to U.S.  
            Census data, approximately 
          1 million of Californians live in disadvantaged, unincorporated  
            communities.  Residents of these areas often live without the  
            basic features of a safe and healthy environment, such as  
            access to clean water, sewage lines, storm drains,  
            streetlights, sidewalks, and safe housing.  These communities  
            are systematically underserved in the overall allocation of  
            public resources and are frequently left out of local planning  
            processes.  

            "To address infrastructure deficits in disadvantaged  
            unincorporated communities, SB 244 (Wolk) requires cities and  
            counties to identify and include these communities in their  
            long-range planning.  LAFCOs are prohibited from approving  
            specific annexations unless the contiguous disadvantaged  
            unincorporated community is also annexed.  Local governments  
            currently lack financial tools necessary to fund the  
            infrastructure upgrades that are necessary when cities annex  
            these communities.  

            "This bill allows local agencies to include tax-increment  
            financing as part of their plan to annex disadvantaged  
            unincorporated communities.  By agreeing to form a special  
            district as part of the annexation process, local agencies may  
            use tax-increment financing to improve or upgrade structures,  
            roads, sewer or water facilitates, or other infrastructure to  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  7

            serve the community."  

           4)LAFCO process - change of organization or reorganization  .  The  
            CKH Act establishes the process for a change of organization  
            (a single proposed change like an annexation which is when a  
            city adds territory to its boundary) or reorganization (more  
            than one change of organization in one proposal like an  
            annexation to a city and detachment from a special district).   
            Existing law provides that a change of organization or  
            reorganization can be initiated in several ways, including by  
            resolution of application by an affected local agency.  

            Upon receipt of a resolution of application by an affected  
            local agency, LAFCO determines 
            if an application is complete if it contains the components  
            required by existing law, including an application fee.  A  
            local agency is required to submit a plan for providing  
            services which must include a description of the services, the  
            level and range of those services, an indication of whether  
            those services can feasibly be extended to the affected  
            territory, an indication of any improvement or upgrading of  
            structure, roads, sewer or water facilities or other  
            conditions the local agency would impose or require within the  
            affected territory and information with respect to how those  
            services will be financed.  

            The CKH Act outlines public notice, hearing, and written  
            report and recommendation requirements on the proposal.  A  
            LAFCO can deny an application, approve an application, and  
            attach terms and conditions to an approval.  If approved by  
            the LAFCO, the proposal is subject to a protest proceeding,  
            unless certain circumstances apply to allow that provision to  
            be waived.  If the protest proceedings have not been waived,  
            then the LAFCO conducts a noticed public hearing to accept  
            protest.  The CKH Act prescribes several different processes  
            for protest and further election requirements depending on the  
            type of organization or reorganization being proposed and the  
            controversy surrounding it.  

           5)Infrastructure Financing Districts (IFDs)  .  Currently, cities  
            and counties can create IFDs and issue bonds to pay for  
            community scale public works, including highways, transit,  
            water systems, sewer projects, flood control, child care  
            facilities, libraries, parks and solid waste facilities.  To  
            repay the bonds, IFDs divert property tax increment revenues  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  8

            from other local governments for a period of 30 years.  IFDs,  
            however, are prohibited from diverting property tax increment  
            revenues from schools.  

            To begin the process for establishing an IFD, current law  
            requires the legislative body of a city to adopt a resolution  
            of intention, which must include: a) a statement that the IFD  
            is proposed to be established, with a description of the  
            boundaries; b) a statement of the type of public facilities  
            proposed to be financed; c) a statement that the tax increment  
            revenue from affected taxing entities may be used; and, d) a  
            time and place for a public hearing on the proposal.  

            Additionally, the city or county must develop an  
            infrastructure plan, send copies to every landowner, consult  
            with other local governments, and hold a public hearing.   
            Every local agency that will contribute its property tax  
            increment revenue to the IFD must approve the plan.  Once the  
            other local officials approve, the city or county must still  
            get the approval 
            of voters in the proposed district, specifically: two-thirds  
            vote to create the district, two-thirds vote to issue bonds,  
            and a majority-vote to set the district's appropriations  
            limit.  The deadline for filing lawsuits to challenge an IFD's  
            creation, financing plan, allocation of property tax increment  
            revenues, and tax allocation bonds is 30 days after local  
            officials obtain voter approval.  

            This bill utilizes the tax increment financing mechanism in  
            IFD Law and requires that the local agencies that choose to  
            participate in the financing plan specify when the tax  
            increment will terminate.  Additionally, this bill allows the  
            tax increment financing plan to include the issuance of debt,  
            but does not contain any of additional requirements described  
            below in IFD Law.  

           6)Policy considerations  .  The Committee may wish to consider the  
            following:

              a)   IFDs and absence of voter threshold  .  The California  
               Taxpayers Association, in opposition to the bill, argues  
               that this bill "creates a backdoor procedure to use tax  
               increment financing without the creation of an  
               infrastructure financing district, which requires a vote of  
               the people.  Should local governments wish to fund new  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  9

               development with tax increment financing, they can already  
               do so by creating an infrastructure financing district with  
               approval from their constituents."  Supporters of this bill  
               argue that the CKH Act already includes requirements that  
               will provide for a public process and voter involvement.   
               The Committee may wish to consider if that is sufficient,  
               absent separate voter requirements pursuant to IFD Law.  

              b)   Type of district  .  

                i)     Financing vs. services  .  Although financing is  
                 necessary to enable the provision of services, it should  
                 be noted that districts for the sole purpose of providing  
                 a financing mechanism that do not deliver services (like  
                 benefit assessment and Mello-Roos districts) are not  
                 under the purview of LAFCOs and are inherently different  
                 than special districts which provide specific public  
                 services.  Given that the Legislature has repeatedly  
                 heard concerns about the large number of special  
                 districts in California, the Committee may wish to  
                 consider if this bill will increase the number of  
                 independent special districts unnecessarily.  

                ii)    Independent vs. dependent  .  The issue that this bill  
                 seeks to address is how to finance infrastructure in  
                 disadvantaged unincorporated communities in light of the  
                 financial obstacles to annexing these communities.  The  
                 Committee may wish to consider if the barrier for a city  
                 or county in providing these services to these  
                 communities is financial, that it may then be appropriate  
                 to only allow new dependent districts to be formed.   
                 Dependent districts are governed by existing legislative  
                 bodies so either a city council or county board of  
                 supervisors would serve as the governing board of the  
                 district.  All County Service Areas which deliver  
                 additional, tailored county services to specific  
                 geographic areas in an unincorporated area, for example,  
                 are dependent districts.  

              c)   Practical considerations.   The Committee may wish to ask  
               the author to make further clarifications in the bill to  
               distinguish the different "plans" the bill authorizes local  
               agencies to use.  This bill includes references to an  
               overall financial plan for providing infrastructure  
               included in the proposal for a change of organization or  








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  10

               reorganization, a plan for financing services and  
               structures agreed to by the local agency submitting the  
               resolution and one or more of the agencies that will  
               provide services, and an infrastructure financing plan  
               adopted by the city and each affected taxing agency.   
               Further clarification would provide better guidance to both  
               local agencies and LAFCOs as to what the bill requires for  
               each plan.  

               In a letter of concern, the California Association of Local  
               Agency Formation Commissions argues that LAFCOs should be  
               provided with additional information including a financial  
               feasibility plan with specified information, and that the  
               process for determination should be more clearly defined so  
               that the applicant will identify the option to form or  
               reorganize a special district instead of a LAFCO amending  
               the proposal.  The Committee may wish to request that the  
               author further work with LAFCOs to address these types of  
               practical and technical issues.  

           7)Related legislation addressing financial disincentives for  
            annexations  .  AB 1521 (Fox), pending in the Senate Governance  
            and Finance Committee, would change the way that growth in the  
            vehicle license fee adjustment amount is calculated to include  
            the growth 
          of assessed valuation including in an annexed area.  Supporters  
            of AB 1521 argue that the bill would remove the fiscal  
            disincentive for existing cities to annex inhabited territory  
            which is inconsistent with state and local growth and  
            governance policies.  

           8)Arguments in support  .  Supporters argue that this bill takes  
                                                        advantage of special districts' ability to provide services to  
            address specific core local service needs and matches it with  
            the utility of tax increment financing.  

           9)Arguments in opposition  .  Opposition argues that this bill  
            creates a backdoor procedure to use tax increment financing  
            without a vote of the people, and creates a funding gap for  
            critical government services.   

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           








                                                                  SB 614
                                                                  Page  11

          California Special Districts Association
          League of California Cities 
           
            Concerns 
           
          California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions

           Opposition 
           
          California Taxpayers Association 

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Misa Yokoi-Shelton / L. GOV. / (916)  
          319-3958