HomeMy WebLinkAboutLegislative Review - AB 921 (Daucher) Redevelopment AgenciesCITY OF PALM DESERT
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE
ACTION ON AB 921 (DAUCHER) AT ITS MEETING OF MARCH
22, 2005
DATE: April 14, 2005
CONTENTS: AB 921 Language
Recommendation:
By Minute Motion, concur with the action taken by the Legislative Review Committee at its
meeting of March 22, 2005, and direct staff to prepare a letter of support for the Mayor's
signature with regard to AB 921 (Daucher) relative to redevelopment agencies.
Executive Summary:
Passage of AB 921 would authorize redevelopment agencies to amend their plans to
extend the time limit on the plan's effectiveness for an additional 25 years without making
a new finding of blight.
Background:
Current law requires redevelopment plans to contain a time limit, not to exceed 30 years
from the adoption of the plan, after which it has no authority to act except to pay previously
incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants or contracts unless the agency
has not completed its affordable housing obligations, in which case the agency retains its
authority in that regard. Current law also requires a redevelopment plan adopted on or
before December 31, 1993, to terminate not more than 40 years from its adoption or
January 1, 2009, whichever is later and authorizes an amendment of plans to extend this
time limit for up to ten additional years.
AB 921 would authorize redevelopment agencies to amend their plans to extend the time
limit on the plan's effectiveness for an additional 25 years without making a new finding of
blight. During this extension, the amount of taxes allocated to an agency would be 50%
of the amount that would otherwise be allocated and would authorize it to use a maximum
of 40% of the amount allocated during the extension for infrastructure improvements that
have a general nexus to the production of market -priced or affordable housing. Of the
amount allocated during the extension, the bill would require the agency to use a minimum
of 60% of the allocation to increase, improve, and preserve market -priced and affordable
housing. Recognizing the critical need in the State of California for local agencies to put
every possible effort into providing communities, the Legislative Committee recommends
that the City Council support AB 921 and direct staff to prepare a letter stating that position
to approprite legislators for the Mayor's signature.
za,
PATRICIA SCULLY, CFEE
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
l�
� f
AHEILA'
R. GILL GAN�
ASSISTANT CITY ME!(N GER/PIO
PAUL S. BSON
DIR OF FINANCE/CITY TREASURER
CARLOS L. ODXGA
MANAGERCITY
AB 921 Assembly Bill - INTRODUCED ��, Pagel of 3
BILL NUMBER: AB 921 INTRODUCED
BILL TEXT
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Daucher
FEBRUARY 18, 2005
An act to amend Section 33670 of, and to add Section 33333.12 to,
the Health and Safety Code, relating to redevelopment.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 921, as introduced, Daucher. Redevelopment.
Existing law requires a redevelopment plan to contain a time
limit, not to exceed 30 years from the adoption of the plan, on the
effectiveness of the plan, after which a redevelopment agency has no
authority to act pursuant to the plan except to pay previously
incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenant or contracts,
unless the agency has not completed its affordable housing
obligations in which case the agency retains its authority in that
regard. Existing law requires a redevelopment plan adopted on or
before December 31, 1993, to terminate not more than 40 years from
the adoption of the plan or January 1, 2009, whichever is later and
authorizes the amendment of that plan to extend this time limit for
up to 10 additional years.
This bill would authorize a redevelopment agency to amend its
redevelopment plan to extend the time limit on the plan's
effectiveness for an additional 25 years without making a new finding
of blight. During this 25 year extension, the amount of taxes
allocated to an agency would be 50% of the amount that would
otherwise be allocated to the agency. The bill would authorize the
agency to use a maximum of 40% of the amount allocated to an agency
during this 25 year extension for infrastructure improvements that
have a general nexus to the production of market -priced or affordable
housing. Of the amount allocated to an agency during this 25 year
extension, the bill would require the agency to use a minimum of 60%
of the amount allocated to an agency during this 25 year extension to
increase, improve, and preserve market -priced and affordable
housing.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State -mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 33333.12 is added to the Health and Safety
Code , to read:
33333.12. Notwithstanding Sections 33333.2, 33333.6, and
33333.10, a redevelopment agency may amend its redevelopment plan to
extend the time limit on the plan's effectiveness for an additional
25 years without making a new finding of blight. Of the amount
allocated to an agency pursuant to Section 33670 during this 25 year
extension, the agency may use a maximum of forty percent for
infrastructure improvements that have a general nexus to the
production of market -priced or affordable housing. Of the amount
allocated to an agency pursuant to Section 33670 during this 25 year
http://info.sen.ca.gov/publbill/asm/ab 0901-0950/ab 921 bill 20050218 introduced.html 2/21/2005
AB 921 Assembly Bill - INTRODUCED
Page 2 of 3
extension, the agency shall use a minimum of sixty percent to
increase, improve, and preserve market -priced and affordable housing.
SEC. 2. Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code is amended
to read:
33670. Any redevelopment plan may contain a provision that taxes,
if any, levied upon taxable property in a redevelopment project each
year by or for the benefit of the State of--�-
state , any city, county, city and county,
district, or other public corporation (hereinafter sometimes called
"taxing agencies") after the effective date of the ordinance
approving the redevelopment plan, shall be divided as follows:(a)
That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon
which the tax is levied each year by or for each of the taxing
agencies upon the total sum of the assessed value of the taxable
property in the redevelopment project as shown upon the assessment
roll used in connection with the taxation of that property by the
taxing agency, last equalized prior to the effective date of the
ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shall be paid to
the respective taxing agencies as taxes by or for the taxing agencies
on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes
levied by or for any taxing agency or agencies which did not include
the territory in a redevelopment project on the effective date of the
ordinance but to which that territory has been annexed or otherwise
included after that effective date, the assessment roll of the county
last equalized on the effective date of the ordinance shall be used
in determining the assessed valuation of the taxable property in the
project on the effective date); and
(b) Except as provided in subdivision (e) or in Section 33492.15,
that portion of the levied taxes each year in excess of that amount
shall be allocated to and when collected shall be paid into a special
fund of the redevelopment agency to pay the principal of and
interest on loans, moneys advanced to, or indebtedness (whether
funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the
redevelopment agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part,
the redevelopment project. Unless and until the total assessed
valuation of the taxable property in a redevelopment project exceeds
the total assessed value of the taxable property in that project as
shown by the last equalized assessment roll referred to in
subdivision (a), all of the taxes levied and collected upon the
taxable property in the redevelopment project shall be paid to the
respective taxing agencies. When the loans, advances, and
indebtedness, if any, and interest thereon, have been paid, all
moneys thereafter received from taxes upon the taxable property in
the redevelopment project shall be paid to the respective taxing
agencies as taxes on all other property are paid.
(c) In any redevelopment project in which taxes have been divided
pursuant to this section prior to 1968, located within any county
with total assessed valuation subject to general property taxes for
the 1967-68 fiscal year between two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000)
and two billion one hundred million dollars ($2,100,000,000), if the
total assessed valuation of taxable property within the redevelopment
project for the 1967-68 fiscal year was reduced, the total sum of
the assessed value of taxable property used as the basis for
apportionment of taxes under subdivision (a) shall be reduced by 10
percent for the 1968-69 fiscal year and fiscal years thereafter.
(d) For the purposes of this section, taxes shall not include
taxes from the supplemental assessment roll levied pursuant to
Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of Part 0.5 of Division 1 of
the Revenue and Taxation Code for the 1983-84 fiscal year.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/Publbill/asmlab 0901-0950/ab 921_bill_20050218 introduced.html 2/21/2005
AB 921 Assembly Bill - INTRODUCED
Page 3 of 3
(e) That portion of the taxes in excess of the amount identified
in subdivision (a) which are attributable to a tax rate levied by a
taxing agency for the purpose of producing revenues in an amount
sufficient to make annual repayments of the principal of, and the
interest on, any bonded indebtedness for the acquisition or
improvement of real property shall be allocated to, and when
collected shall be paid into, the fund of that taxing agency. This
subdivision shall only apply to taxes levied to repay bonded
indebtedness approved by the voters of the taxing agency on or after
January 1, 1989.
(f) A redevelopment agency that extends the effectiveness of its
redevelopment plan pursuant to Section 33333.12 shall receive, during
the period of extension, 50 percent of the amount that would
otherwise be allocated to the agency pursuant to this section.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/publbilllasmlab_0901-0950/ab_921 bill_20050218_introduced.html 2/21/2005