BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 944
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 18, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ACCOUNTABILITY AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Jim Frazier, Chair
SB 944 (Torres) - As Amended: June 11, 2014
SENATE VOTE : 35-0
SUBJECT : Surplus state property
SUMMARY : Prohibits a local government from prezoning, zoning,
or rezoning surplus state real property (surplus property)
within its jurisdiction unless the change is requested or
approved by the Department of General Services (DGS).
Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits a local government from prezoning, zoning, or
rezoning surplus property within its jurisdiction unless DGS
requests or approves the change.
2)Requires a local agency or affordable housing developer, when
being considered a potential priority buyer for surplus
property, to demonstrate to DGS that the property is to be
used for, among other purposes, development of projects that
create sustainable jobs of benefit to the area and region
where the property is located.
3)Specifies that, if more than one local agency expresses
interest in the surplus property, priority must be given to
the agency that intends to use it for affordable housing or
development of projects that create sustainable jobs of
benefit to the area and region where the property is located.
4)Modifies existing legislative intent declaring the provision
of decent housing for all Californians is a state goal of the
highest priority when the state disposes of surplus property
to also include the creation of sustainable jobs as a state
goal.
5)Modifies existing legislative declarations relating to a
priority system for the disposal of surplus property to also
include development of projects that create sustainable jobs
of benefit to the area and region where the property is
located when the property is suitable for those purposes.
SB 944
Page 2
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes DGS to dispose of state real property declared
surplus by the Legislature by sale, lease, exchange, or any
other manner, and upon terms deemed to be in the state's best
interests.
2)Requires surplus property that is not needed by any state
agency to first be offered to local agencies, and then to
nonprofit affordable housing sponsors, before being offered
for sale to private entities or individuals.
3)Expresses legislative intent declaring that the provision of
decent housing for all Californians is a state goal of the
highest priority, and that priority be given to the disposal
of surplus property to housing for persons and families of low
or moderate income.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8., negligible state
costs.
COMMENTS : The author states that, in the recent past, DGS has
encountered situations where local governments have re-zoned
state surplus property, resulting in a reduction of the value.
The author is concerned that this might happen when the
Lanterman Developmental Center (LDC), surplus property in her
district, is sold. The author asserts that changes to the
zoning of the property could potentially decrease the market
value and be inconsistent with the long-term interests of the
surrounding area and region, particularly the need to provide
sustainable job creation in an area with high unemployment.
According to DGS, the 302-acre LDC property was declared surplus
in 1996. Currently, DGS reports that the state is considering
whether any portions of the land could be used by the California
Polytechnic University in the area before proceeding with
additional development options.
DGS cites two instances in which local agencies initiated
actions to re-zone surplus real estate to reduce, or attempt to
reduce, their fair market value: the County of Napa's re-zone of
the Napa State Hospital, and the City of Los Angeles re-zoning
of the L.A. Civic Center. A reduction in value occurs because a
real estate appraiser is required to consider the current zoning
SB 944
Page 3
of the property when determining its fair market value. If a
property is re-zoned prior to final appraisal, the local agency
is then able to acquire the property at a price substantially
below the fair market value that existed prior to the zoning
change.
This bill prohibits a local government from pre-zoning, zoning,
or re-zoning surplus property within its jurisdiction prior to
sale unless the change is requested or approved by DGS.
Local agencies and affordable housing developers may be
considered priority buyers of surplus property if they can
demonstrate to DGS that the property is to be used for the
following statutory purposes: open space, public parks,
affordable housing, or development of local government-owned
facilities. Under these circumstances, the Director of DGS may
transfer the property for less than fair market value. This
bill expands the current statutory list to include the
development of projects that create sustainable jobs that
benefit the area and region where the property is located.
However, it is silent with regard to how DGS would award
priority based on sustainable job creation.
Local governments object to this bill, contending that it
unconstitutionally interferes with local land use authority and
gives the state veto power over locally driven zoning decisions.
PRIOR LEGISLATION :
1)AB 503 (Wieckowski) of 2013 would have authorized DGS to
transfer surplus property to a local agency at a price below
fair market value if the property would be used solely for
public school purposes and would have allowed DGS to negotiate
with the Santa Clara Unified School District and the City of
San Jose to transfer title of the former Agnews Developmental
Center, at below fair market value, for public school
purposes. AB 503 was held on the Senate Appropriations
Committee Suspense File.
2)AB 2279 (Evans), Chapter 595, Statutes of 2010, authorizes DGS
to sell or exchange, at fair market value based upon an
appraisal approved by DGS, all or part of a specified parcel
of state property only to the County of Napa upon terms,
conditions, reservations, and exceptions that DGS determines
SB 944
Page 4
are in the best interest of the state, by January 1, 2015.
Any agreement for the sale or exchange of the property must
include a provision that requires the County of Napa to retain
title to the property for use as a park or wilderness
preserve, or in the event of a future sale of that property by
the county.
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS : Committee staff suggests narrowing the
zoning change provisions in this bill to apply specifically to
the LDC property in the author's district. For timing purposes,
these amendments, as described below, will be done in the next
policy committee.
On page 8,delete lines 3-9 entirely and replace with the
following language:
(e) Notwithstanding any other law, the state real property
known as Lanterman Developmental Center, located at 3530
Pomona Boulevard, Pomona, Los Angeles County, which has
been declared surplus pursuant to Section 11011, shall not
be prezoned, zoned, or rezoned, unless the Department of
General Services requests that the property be rezoned or
approves the rezoning of the property.
DOUBLE REFERRAL : This bill is double referred to the Assembly
Committee on Local Government.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
Opposition
California State Association of Counties
League of California Cities
Analysis Prepared by : Cassie Royce / A. & A.R. / (916)
319-3600