AB 471 California Assembly · 2013-2014 Regular Session

Local government: redevelopment: successor agencies to redevelopment agencies.

Summary
(1) Existing law authorizes the creation of infrastructure financing districts, as defined, for the sole purpose of financing public facilities, subject to adoption of a resolution by the legislative body and affected taxing entities proposed to be subject to the division of taxes and voter approval requirements. Existing law prohibits an infrastructure financing district from including any portion of a redevelopment project area. This bill would delete that prohibition and would authorize a district to finance a project or portion of a project that is located in, or overlaps with, a redevelopment project area or former redevelopment project area, as specified. (2) Existing law requires a successor agency to submit a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule to the Department of Finance, and requires the successor agency to make payments pursuant to that schedule. This bill would authorize the successor agency to schedule Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule payments beyond the existing Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle upon a showing that a lender requires cash on hand beyond the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle, or when a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period. The bill would authorize the successor agency to utilize reasonable estimates and projections to support payment amounts where a payment is shown to be due during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule period but an invoice or other billing document has not been received, if the successor agency submits appropriate supporting documentation for the basis of the estimate or projection to the department and the auditor-controller. The bill would provide that a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule may also include appropriation of moneys from bonds subject to passage during the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule cycle when an enforceable obligation requires the agency to issue the bonds and use the proceeds to pay for project expenditures. (3) Existing law requires the county auditor-controller to determine the amount of property taxes that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency if it had not been dissolved and to deposit this amount in a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in the county. Existing law requires the conducting of a due diligence review to determine the unobligated balances available for transfer to affected taxing entities. Existing law requires the county auditor-controller for each fiscal year to allocate moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund for passthrough payment obligations, enforceable obligations of the dissolved redevelopment agency, and administrative costs, as specified. Any remaining moneys in the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund are required to be distributed as local property tax revenues to local agencies and school entities, as specified. This bill would require that, under specified conditions, on July 1, 2014, and twice yearly thereafter until July 1, 2018, funds be allocated to cover the housing entity administrative cost allowance of a local housing authority that has assumed the housing duties of the former redevelopment agency, as specified, before remaining moneys are distributed to local agencies and school entities. The bill would define "housing entity administrative cost allowance" for these purposes. This bill would also exclude from the calculation of the amount distributed to taxing entities during the 2012–13 base year the amounts distributed to taxing entities pursuant to the due diligence review process. By imposing additional duties upon local public officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law requires a successor agency to prepare a long-range property management plan that addresses the disposition and use of the real properties of a former redevelopment agency and requires a transfer of the property to the city, county, or city and county if the plan directs the use or liquidation of the property for a project identified in an approved redevelopment plan, as specified. This bill would specify that the term "identified in an approved redevelopment plan" includes properties listed in a community plan or a 5-year implementation plan. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill status signed all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Feb 2014
Assembly Passage
May 2013
Senate Passage
Feb 2014
Signed into Law
Feb 2014
Introduced Feb 19, 2013 Signed Feb 18, 2014
Floor votes · Senate Feb 6, 2014 · Assembly Feb 10, 2014

How they voted

310
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 34
Feb 6, 2014
D Democratic25
22 Yea 3
88% Yea
R Republican9
9 Yea
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
29
Key actions
11
Committee
12
Amendments
3
Feb 18, 2014
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Feb 10, 2014
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (63-0-3)
assembly
Feb 10, 2014
Lower · Passed
Urgency clause adopted. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 75. Noes 0. Page 3798.).
lower
Feb 6, 2014
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-0-3)
senate
Feb 6, 2014
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after February 8 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jan 23, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (January 23).
upper
Jan 21, 2014
Upper · Passed
In committee: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jan 17, 2014
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jan 15, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (January 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jan 9, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
upper
Jan 8, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Jan 6, 2014
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
upper
Jun 27, 2013
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
May 23, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
upper
May 2, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 1).
lower
Apr 17, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 19. Noes 0.) (April 16). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 14, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Feb 20, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
lower
0 primary · 5 co-sponsors

Sponsors

No sponsor information available.