Local government: redevelopment: revenues from property tax override rates.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 1009 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on AB 1009.
You're tracking AB 1009
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 1009 — Local government: redevelopment: revenues from property tax override rates.
Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2015-2016 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires revenues equivalent to those that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency, had the agency not been dissolved, to be allocated to the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund of each successor agency for making payments on the principal of and interest on loans, and moneys advanced to or indebtedness incurred by the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires, from February 1, 2012, to July 1, 2012, inclusive, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the county auditor-controller, after deducting administrative costs, to allocate property tax revenues in each Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in a specified manner. This bill would authorize a city or county that levies a property tax rate, approved by the voters of a city or county to make payments in support of pension programs and levied in addition to the general property tax rate, to make a request to an oversight board to prohibit revenues derived from that property tax rate from being deposited into a Redevelopment Property Tax Fund. This bill would authorize an oversight board to deny this request based on substantial evidence that a former redevelopment agency made a pledge of revenues that specifically included revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate. This bill, for the 2015–16 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, except to the extent an oversight board denies a request, would prohibit any revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate from being allocated to a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund and would, instead, require these revenues to be allocated to, and when collected to be paid into, the fund of the city or county whose voters approved the tax. The bill would require all allocations of revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate made by any county auditor-controller prior to July 1, 2015, to be deemed correct, and would prohibit any city, county, county auditor-controller, successor agency, or affected taxing entity from being subject to any claim, as specified. This bill would require, to the extent that revenues derived from the imposition of a property tax rate, approved by the voters of a city or county to make payments in support of pension programs and levied in addition to the general property tax rate, are deposited into a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund, the county-auditor controller to allocate moneys from each Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund to a city or county that levies a property tax as so described after certain other allocations have been made. By adding to the duties of local government officials, 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 these statutory provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
1 added · 1 removed1 line(s) added, 1 removed.
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBillText Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
View plain text versions (2)
- Introduced 02/26/15 - Introduced Current pdf February 26, 2015
- AB1009 View text html
Action History
-
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
-
Died pursuant to Article IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.
-
In committee: Held under submission.
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 29.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Robert Garcia · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Garcia, Robert Democratic
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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 0% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Not Voting |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1009 do?
- Existing law dissolved redevelopment agencies and community development agencies as of February 1, 2012, and provides for the designation of successor agencies to wind down the affairs of the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires revenues equivalent to those that would have been allocated to each redevelopment agency, had the agency not been dissolved, to be allocated to the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund of each successor agency for making payments on the principal of and interest on loans, and moneys advanced to or indebtedness incurred by the dissolved redevelopment agencies. Existing law requires, from February 1, 2012, to July 1, 2012, inclusive, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the county auditor-controller, after deducting administrative costs, to allocate property tax revenues in each Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund in a specified manner. This bill would authorize a city or county that levies a property tax rate, approved by the voters of a city or county to make payments in support of pension programs and levied in addition to the general property tax rate, to make a request to an oversight board to prohibit revenues derived from that property tax rate from being deposited into a Redevelopment Property Tax Fund. This bill would authorize an oversight board to deny this request based on substantial evidence that a former redevelopment agency made a pledge of revenues that specifically included revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate. This bill, for the 2015–16 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, except to the extent an oversight board denies a request, would prohibit any revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate from being allocated to a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund and would, instead, require these revenues to be allocated to, and when collected to be paid into, the fund of the city or county whose voters approved the tax. The bill would require all allocations of revenues derived from the imposition of that property tax rate made by any county auditor-controller prior to July 1, 2015, to be deemed correct, and would prohibit any city, county, county auditor-controller, successor agency, or affected taxing entity from being subject to any claim, as specified. This bill would require, to the extent that revenues derived from the imposition of a property tax rate, approved by the voters of a city or county to make payments in support of pension programs and levied in addition to the general property tax rate, are deposited into a Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund, the county-auditor controller to allocate moneys from each Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund to a city or county that levies a property tax as so described after certain other allocations have been made. By adding to the duties of local government officials, 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 these statutory provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
- Who sponsors AB 1009?
- AB 1009 is sponsored by Garcia, Robert (Democratic).
- What is the current status of AB 1009?
- This bill died with 2015-2016 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 1009?
- Track AB 1009 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1009
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.
Stay ahead of AB 1009
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →