California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

AB 2268 — Local government finance: property tax revenue allocations: vehicle license fee adjustments.

Last action — In committee: Held under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, in each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally provides that each jurisdiction be allocated an amount equal to the total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined. Existing property tax law also requires that, for purposes of determining property tax revenue allocations in each county for the 1992–93 and 1993–94 fiscal years, the amounts of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the county, cities, and special districts be reduced in accordance with certain formulas. It requires that the revenues not allocated to the county, cities, and special districts as a result of these reductions be transferred to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in that county for allocation to school districts, community college districts, and the county office of education. Beginning with the 2004–05 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, existing law requires that each city, county, and city and county receive additional property tax revenues in the form of a vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined, from a Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund that exists in each county treasury. Existing law requires that these additional allocations be funded from ad valorem property tax revenues otherwise required to be allocated to educational entities. Existing law, for the 2006–07 fiscal year, and for each fiscal year thereafter, requires the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year, if specified provisions did not apply, and the product of that sum and the percentage change from the prior fiscal year in the gross taxable valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity. Existing law establishes a separate vehicle license fee adjustment amount for a city that was incorporated after January 1, 2004, or on or before January 1, 2012. This bill, for the 2018–19 fiscal year, would instead require the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount in the 2017–18 fiscal year, the product of that sum and the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of that entity between the 2017–18 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, and the product of the amount of specified motor vehicle license fee revenues that the Controller allocated to the applicable city in July 2010 and 1.17. This bill, for the 2019–20 fiscal year, and for each fiscal year thereafter, would require the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year and the product of the amount as so described and the percentage change from the prior fiscal year in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity. By imposing additional duties upon local tax officials with respect to the allocation of ad valorem property tax revenues, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Held under submission.

  2. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  3. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. Read second time and amended.

  5. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 11).

  6. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  7. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.

  8. Referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  9. From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.

  10. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 9 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 3000
Unaffiliated 5000
Republican 1000
Total 9000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

taxation finance
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2268 do?
Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, in each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally provides that each jurisdiction be allocated an amount equal to the total of the amount of revenue allocated to that jurisdiction in the prior fiscal year, subject to certain modifications, and that jurisdiction's portion of the annual tax increment, as defined. Existing property tax law also requires that, for purposes of determining property tax revenue allocations in each county for the 1992–93 and 1993–94 fiscal years, the amounts of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the county, cities, and special districts be reduced in accordance with certain formulas. It requires that the revenues not allocated to the county, cities, and special districts as a result of these reductions be transferred to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in that county for allocation to school districts, community college districts, and the county office of education. Beginning with the 2004–05 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, existing law requires that each city, county, and city and county receive additional property tax revenues in the form of a vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined, from a Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund that exists in each county treasury. Existing law requires that these additional allocations be funded from ad valorem property tax revenues otherwise required to be allocated to educational entities. Existing law, for the 2006–07 fiscal year, and for each fiscal year thereafter, requires the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year, if specified provisions did not apply, and the product of that sum and the percentage change from the prior fiscal year in the gross taxable valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity. Existing law establishes a separate vehicle license fee adjustment amount for a city that was incorporated after January 1, 2004, or on or before January 1, 2012. This bill, for the 2018–19 fiscal year, would instead require the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount in the 2017–18 fiscal year, the product of that sum and the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of that entity between the 2017–18 fiscal year to the 2018–19 fiscal year, and the product of the amount of specified motor vehicle license fee revenues that the Controller allocated to the applicable city in July 2010 and 1.17. This bill, for the 2019–20 fiscal year, and for each fiscal year thereafter, would require the vehicle license fee adjustment amount to be the sum of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year and the product of the amount as so described and the percentage change from the prior fiscal year in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity. By imposing additional duties upon local tax officials with respect to the allocation of ad valorem property tax revenues, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors AB 2268?
AB 2268 is sponsored by Reyes, Eloise Gómez (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 2268?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 2268?
Track AB 2268 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2268

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2268

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →