California 2009-2010, 3rd Special Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 29 — Community redevelopment: education.

Last action — From Assembly without further action.

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

This bill died with 2009-2010, 3rd Special Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

(1) Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, for each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally requires 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 law requires a redevelopment agency to make a remittance, as determined by the Director of Finance prior to May 10, to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) for the 2008–09 fiscal year and authorizes a legislative body to remit, in lieu of making that payment prior to May 10, 2009, a designated amount to the county auditor for deposit in the county ERAF. This bill would additionally require a redevelopment agency to make the remittance for the 2009–10 and 2010–11 fiscal years and would require the agency to remit that payment on or before June 30 of that fiscal year. The bill would make conforming changes to provisions of existing law relating to revenue payments deposited by redevelopment agencies in the county ERAF for allocation to school entities. The bill would require the county auditor-controller to distribute funds that are remitted to the county ERAF by a city-operated or county-operated redevelopment agency only to a K-12 school district, as defined, that is located partially or entirely within the project area of the redevelopment agency in an amount proportional to the average daily attendance of each school district. The bill would require the county superintendent of schools to provide the average daily attendance reported for each school district as of the Second Proportional Apportionment for the 2008–09, 2009–10, and 2010–11 fiscal years to the county auditor-controller. The bill would require the county auditor-controller to notify, on or before October 1 of that fiscal year, the Department of Finance of the amount of funding apportioned to each school district pursuant to this act. The bill would also require, for the 2008–09, 2009–10, and 2010–11 fiscal years the amount apportioned by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to each school district pursuant to a specified provision of existing law and, for purposes of making the computations required by Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution, specified General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts, to be reduced by the total amount of ERAF moneys a school district receives, regardless of the actual date the funds are received from each redevelopment agency. By imposing new duties upon local tax officials and school districts with regard to the annual allocation of these revenues, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) This bill would incorporate changes in Section 33685 of the Health and Safety Code as proposed by either AB 198 or SB 80 of the 2009–10 Regular Session that would only become operative if either AB 198 or SB 80 is enacted and becomes effective immediately, either bill amends Section 33685 of the Health and Safety Code, and this bill is enacted after either bill. (3) 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 these statutory provisions. (4) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Assembly without further action.

  2. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  3. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 23. Noes 15. Page 188.) To Assembly.

  4. Senate Rule 29.3 suspended. (Ayes 23. Noes 13. Page 183.)

  5. Placed on third reading.

  6. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 23. Noes 14. Page 193.)

  7. (Ayes 25. Noes 12. Page 182.)

  8. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.

  9. Read third time. Amended. (Ayes 23. Noes 13. Page 180.)

  10. Read second time. To third reading.

  11. Placed on second reading file.

  12. Withdrawn from committee.

  13. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS.

Sponsors

  • Ducheny · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Ducheny

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.

Passed 24 Yea · 14 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 211303
Democratic 3000
Republican 0100
Total 241403
% of votes cast 59%34%0%7%
How each member voted (41)
Member Party Vote
Cox — Nay
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Nay
Yee — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Negrete — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Florez — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hollingsworth — Nay
Kehoe — Yea
Runner — Nay
Leno — Yea
Cogdill — Nay
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Not Voting
McLeod — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Romero — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Nay
Wiggins — Yea
Wolk — Not Voting
Ducheny — Yea
Dutton — Nay
Aanestad — Not Voting
Alquist — Yea
Ashburn — Nay
Benoit — Nay
Harman — Nay
Huff — Nay
Liu — Yea
Maldonado — Nay
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wright — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Senate 3rd Reading SB29 Ducheny

Passed 24 Yea · 15 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 211402
Democratic 3000
Republican 0100
Total 241502
% of votes cast 59%37%0%5%
How each member voted (41)
Member Party Vote
Wyland — Nay
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Not Voting
Cox — Nay
DeSaulnier — Not Voting
Denham — Nay
Florez — Yea
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Runner — Nay
Cogdill — Nay
Huff — Nay
Aanestad — Nay
Ashburn — Nay
Dutton — Nay
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Nay
Wiggins — Yea
Wright — Yea
Benoit — Nay
Harman — Nay
Hollingsworth — Nay
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Maldonado — Nay
Oropeza — Yea
Romero — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

taxation education
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 SB 29 do?
(1) Existing property tax law requires the county auditor, for each fiscal year, to allocate property tax revenue to local jurisdictions in accordance with specified formulas and procedures, and generally requires 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 law requires a redevelopment agency to make a remittance, as determined by the Director of Finance prior to May 10, to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) for the 2008–09 fiscal year and authorizes a legislative body to remit, in lieu of making that payment prior to May 10, 2009, a designated amount to the county auditor for deposit in the county ERAF. This bill would additionally require a redevelopment agency to make the remittance for the 2009–10 and 2010–11 fiscal years and would require the agency to remit that payment on or before June 30 of that fiscal year. The bill would make conforming changes to provisions of existing law relating to revenue payments deposited by redevelopment agencies in the county ERAF for allocation to school entities. The bill would require the county auditor-controller to distribute funds that are remitted to the county ERAF by a city-operated or county-operated redevelopment agency only to a K-12 school district, as defined, that is located partially or entirely within the project area of the redevelopment agency in an amount proportional to the average daily attendance of each school district. The bill would require the county superintendent of schools to provide the average daily attendance reported for each school district as of the Second Proportional Apportionment for the 2008–09, 2009–10, and 2010–11 fiscal years to the county auditor-controller. The bill would require the county auditor-controller to notify, on or before October 1 of that fiscal year, the Department of Finance of the amount of funding apportioned to each school district pursuant to this act. The bill would also require, for the 2008–09, 2009–10, and 2010–11 fiscal years the amount apportioned by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to each school district pursuant to a specified provision of existing law and, for purposes of making the computations required by Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution, specified General Fund revenues appropriated for school districts, to be reduced by the total amount of ERAF moneys a school district receives, regardless of the actual date the funds are received from each redevelopment agency. By imposing new duties upon local tax officials and school districts with regard to the annual allocation of these revenues, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) This bill would incorporate changes in Section 33685 of the Health and Safety Code as proposed by either AB 198 or SB 80 of the 2009–10 Regular Session that would only become operative if either AB 198 or SB 80 is enacted and becomes effective immediately, either bill amends Section 33685 of the Health and Safety Code, and this bill is enacted after either bill. (3) 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 these statutory provisions. (4) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. The Governor issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 19, 2008. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared by the Governor by proclamation issued on December 19, 2008, pursuant to the California Constitution.
Who sponsors SB 29?
SB 29 is sponsored by Ducheny.
What is the current status of SB 29?
This bill died with 2009-2010, 3rd Special Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 SB 29?
Track SB 29 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 29

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 SB 29

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →