text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, in the County of Orange, for the 1996–97 fiscal year, the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to a flood control district or a harbors, beaches and parks fund shall be reduced by four million dollars ($4,000,000) each, and the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the county shall be increased by an amount equal to the combined amount of those reductions. For each of the 1997–98 to 2015–16 fiscal years, inclusive, the auditor shall allocate property tax revenues in those amounts that fully reflect the modifications required by the preceding sentence.

(b) For the 2016–17 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall allocate property tax revenues in those amounts that would be determined if subdivision (a) had not applied to any prior fiscal year.

(c) This section shall not take effect unless and until (1) a plan of adjustment is confirmed in Case No. SA-94-22272-JR in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California or (2) a trustee is appointed pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 30400) of Division 3 of Title 3 of the Government Code.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 745, Sec. 5. Effective January 1, 1996. Section conditionally operative by its own provisions.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


kind: section

code: RTC

text:
(a) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Auditor for the County of San Diego shall, in allocating ad valorem property tax revenues in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 96.1 in each of the 1999–2000, 2000–01, and 2001–02 fiscal years, do both of the following:

(A) Decrease the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise deemed allocated to the County of San Diego in the prior fiscal year by an amount, not to exceed three million dollars ($3,000,000), as specified in an ordinance or resolution as described in subdivision (b).

(B) Increase the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise deemed allocated to the county free library in the prior fiscal year by an amount equal to the amount of the decrease required by subparagraph (A).

(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in each of the 1999–2000, 2000–01, and 2001–02 fiscal years only, the auditor shall allocate the “annual tax increment” pursuant to Section 96.5 in those amounts that would be so allocated if no reduction or increase had been required in any fiscal year pursuant to paragraph (1). In the 2002–03 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall allocate the “annual tax increment” pursuant to Section 96.5 in those amounts that fully reflect any increase or decrease required in any fiscal year by paragraph (1).

(b) Subdivision (a) shall not become operative unless the Board of Supervisors for the County of San Diego adopts, with the approval of a majority of its entire membership, an ordinance or resolution declaring that the subdivision is operative. Any ordinance or resolution that is adopted pursuant to the preceding sentence shall do both of the following:

(1) Specify either the amount that is to be reallocated in accordance with paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) in each fiscal year described in that subdivision, or a procedure for determining that reallocation amount for each of those same fiscal years.

(2) Prohibit the total of the amounts reallocated in accordance with paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) from exceeding nine million dollars ($9,000,000).

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 824, Sec. 1. Effective October 10, 1999.)

division: 1. PROPERTY TAXATION

chapter: 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations

path: 1. PROPERTY TAXATION > 0.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE XIII A OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION > 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue > 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of Riverside for each fiscal year to the 1999–2000 fiscal year, inclusive, are deemed to be correct. However, for the 2000–01 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of Riverside shall be determined on the basis of property tax apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been fully corrected and adjusted, pursuant to the review and recommendation of the Controller, as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentence.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2000, Ch. 604, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2001.)

part: 0.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE XIII A OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in the County of Solano, the apportionment of property tax revenues made pursuant to Section 96.2 or its predecessor section, for the 1987–88 fiscal year only, shall be modified as follows:

(1) The auditor shall increase by the sum of two hundred sixty-three thousand dollars ($263,000) the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to the City of Suisun.

(2) The auditor shall reduce by the sum of ninety thousand dollars ($90,000) the total amount of property tax revenue apportioned to the Solano County General Fund.

(3) The auditor shall reduce by the total sum of one hundred seventy-three thousand dollars ($173,000) the total amount of property tax revenue apportioned to all of the following: the Solano County Free Library; the Greater Vallejo Recreation District; the Solano County Water Conservation District; the Solano County Accumulated Capital Outlay Fund; the Solano County Aviation; the Solano County Recreation; the Solano County Zone of Benefit 1; the Solano County Library Special Tax Zone 1; the Fairfield-Suisun Cemetery District; the Solano County portion of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; and the Cities of Benicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Vacaville, Rio Vista, and Vallejo. The reduction required by this paragraph shall be made by the auditor by computing that percentage of the total amount of property tax revenue allocated to all of the jurisdictions and funds specified in this paragraph which equals one hundred seventy-three thousand dollars ($173,000) and by reducing the total amount of property tax revenue allocated to each of those jurisdictions and funds by that percentage.

(b) For the 1988–89 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall increase the total amount of property tax revenue apportioned to the City of Suisun pursuant to Section 96.2 by the same percentage by which the total amount of property tax revenue to be apportioned to the city pursuant to Section 96.2 in the 1987–88 fiscal year was increased by the application of subdivision (a).

(c) For the 1988–89 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall reduce the total amount of property tax revenue apportioned to each jurisdiction and fund specified in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) as follows:

(1) The auditor shall compute for each jurisdiction and fund that percentage of the total amount of the property tax revenue reduction required by subdivision (a) for the 1987–88 fiscal year which is equal to the total amount of its property tax revenue reduction for that fiscal year.

(2) The auditor shall reduce the total amount of the property tax revenue apportioned to each jurisdiction and fund for the applicable fiscal year by the amount determined by multiplying the percentage computed for the jurisdiction or fund in paragraph (1) by the total amount of the increase computed in subdivision (b).

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1994, Ch. 1167, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 1995.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in any county with an eligible city, the apportionment of property tax revenues made pursuant to Section 96.2 or its predecessor section, for the 1988–89 fiscal year only, shall be modified as follows:

(1) The auditor shall increase the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to an eligible city by an amount equal to 20 percent of the “additional amount” provided to that city pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 95.

(2) The auditor shall reduce by the amount determined in paragraph (1) the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to an eligible local agency authorized to maintain vehicular recreation areas pursuant to Section 5541.1 of the Public Resources Code.

(b) For the 1988–89 fiscal year only, the allocation of annual tax increment pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 98 or its predecessor section to the eligible city and the eligible local agency shall be adjusted correspondingly to reflect the modifications made by subdivision (a).

(c) For purposes of the calculations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, in the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts that are allocated to any eligible city and any eligible local agency pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be included in the “amount of property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this chapter in the prior year.”

(d) For the purposes of this section, “eligible city” means any city which received an additional amount of state assistance payments in accordance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 95.

(e) The amount allocated to an eligible city pursuant to this section shall be expended for zoo purposes only.

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in the County of Nevada, the apportionment of property tax revenues made pursuant to Section 96.2 or its predecessor section shall be modified for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, as follows:

(1) The auditor shall increase by the sum of fifty-six thousand six hundred eighty-four dollars ($56,684) the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to the North San Juan Fire Protection District.

(2) The auditor shall reduce by the sum of thirty-one thousand seven hundred eighty-three dollars ($31,783) the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to the Nevada County General Fund.

(3) The auditor shall reduce by the sum of twenty-four thousand nine hundred one dollars ($24,901) the total amount of property tax revenues apportioned to all of the following local agencies within Nevada County: Nevada County Solid Waste; the Nevada Irrigation District; the City of Nevada City; the City of Grass Valley; Higgins Area Fire Protection District; Truckee Fire Protection District; the Truckee Sanitary District; the Nevada Cemetery District; the Truckee Cemetery District; the Nevada Resource Conservation District; the San Juan Ridge County Water District; the Washington County Water District; the Tahoe Forest Hospital; the Donner Summit Public Utility District; the Tahoe Airport District; the Gold Flat Fire Protection District; the Alta Oaks Sunset Fire Protection District; the Forty Niner Fire Protection District; the Ophir Hill Fire Protection District; the Consolidated Fire District; the Peardale-Chicago Park Fire Protection District; the Rough and Ready Fire Protection District; the Watt Park Fire Protection District; the Truckee Donner Park and Recreation District; the Tahoe Truckee Sanitation District; the Penn Valley Fire District; County Service Area 1A; County Service Area 2; County Service Area 3; County Service Area 4; County Service Area 5; County Service Area 10; County Service Area 11; County Service Area 16; and the Lake of the Pines Ranchos Community Services District. The reduction required by this paragraph shall be made by the auditor by computing that percentage of the total amount of property tax revenues allocated in fiscal year 1993–94 to all of the jurisdictions and funds specified in this paragraph that equals twenty-four thousand nine hundred one dollars ($24,901) and by reducing the total amount of property tax revenues allocated to each of those jurisdictions and funds by that percentage.

(b) (1) For purposes of the calculations made pursuant to Section 96.1 in the 1994–95 fiscal year, the amount allocated to the North San Juan Fire Protection District in the 1993–94 fiscal year pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) shall be included in the “amount of property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this chapter in the prior year.”

(2) For the 1994–95 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the North San Juan Fire Protection District shall be allocated a share of the annual tax increment equal to 2.56 percent of the total of the annual tax increment amounts calculated under Section 96.5 for each of the tax rate areas comprising the North San Juan Fire Protection District. The auditor shall commensurately reduce on a pro rata basis the shares of the annual tax increment to be allocated to other local agencies, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 95, within those tax rate areas.

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of San Benito for each fiscal year through the 2000–01 fiscal year, inclusive, are deemed to be correct. Notwithstanding the audit time limits specified in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 96.1, the county auditor shall make the allocation adjustments identified in the State Controller’s audit of the County of San Benito for the 2001–02 fiscal year pursuant to the other provisions of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 96.1. For the 2002–03 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of San Benito shall be determined on the basis of property tax apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been fully corrected and adjusted, pursuant to the review and recommendation of the Controller, as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentences.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2015, Ch. 325, Sec. 25. (SB 107) Effective September 22, 2015.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of Plumas for each fiscal year through the 1993–94 fiscal year shall be deemed correct. However, commencing with the 1994–95 fiscal year, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenue in the County of Plumas shall be determined on the basis of apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been corrected or adjusted as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentence.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 179, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 1996.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of Santa Clara for the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District for each fiscal year from the 1988–89 fiscal year through the 1996–97 fiscal year shall be deemed correct, except to the extent that those apportionment factors reflect any calculation errors made in implementing Article 3 (commencing with Section 97). However, commencing with the 1997–98 fiscal year, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenue in the County of Santa Clara shall be determined on the basis of property tax apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been fully corrected or adjusted as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentence.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 567, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2000.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text:
(a) For the 1985–86 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, a jurisdiction shall not impose a property tax rate pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 93, unless it is imposed for one or more of the following purposes:

(1) To make annual payments for the interest and principal on general obligation bonds approved by the voters before July 1, 1978, and on bonded indebtedness for the acquisition and improvement of real property approved by the voters by a two-thirds vote after June 4, 1986.

(2) To make payments to the State of California under contracts for the sale, delivery, or use of water entered into pursuant to California Water Resources Development Bond Act in Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 12930) of Part 6 of Division 6 of the Water Code or to make payments to the United States or another public agency under voter-approved contracts for the sale, delivery, or use of water or for the repayment of voter-approved obligations for the construction, maintenance, or operation of water conservation, treatment, or distribution facilities, provided that the indebtedness was approved by the voters before July 1, 1978.

(3) To make payments pursuant to lease-purchase programs approved by the voters before July 1, 1978, provided that the jurisdiction imposed the property tax rate in the 1982–83 fiscal year.

(4) To make payments in support of pension programs approved by the voters before July 1, 1978, provided that the local agency imposed the property tax rate in the 1982–83 or 1983–84 fiscal year.

(5) To make payments in support of paramedic, library, or zoo programs approved by the voters before July 1, 1978, provided that the jurisdiction imposed the property tax rate in the 1982–83 fiscal year.

(6) To make payments for the interest and principal on an indebtedness, pursuant to Section 5544.2 of the Public Resources Code, approved by the voters before July 1, 1978, provided that the local agency imposed the property tax rate in the 1982–83 fiscal year.

(b) In the 1985–86 fiscal year and any fiscal year thereafter, a jurisdiction shall not impose a property tax rate, pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 93, in excess of the rate it imposed in the 1982–83 or 1983–84 fiscal year. Notwithstanding the limit imposed by this subdivision, a higher property tax rate may be imposed whenever necessary to make payments for any of the purposes specified in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subdivision (a). However, no property tax rate increase in excess of the rate imposed in the 1984–85 fiscal year shall be imposed if the purpose of the rate increase is to fund a reduction in the rates charged for water at the time of the property tax rate increase.

(c) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) and (b), a charter city may levy an ad valorem property tax rate to make payments in support of a retirement system for fire and police employees if all of the following criteria are met:

(1) The retirement system is part of the city’s charter and was approved by the voters before July 1, 1978.

(2) The city did not levy a separate ad valorem property tax rate to support the retirement system in the 1983–84 fiscal year.

(3) The retirement system provides for a cost-of-living adjustment that is indexed to a consumer price index and does not limit the annual increases which may be paid to members after their retirement.

(4) The retirement system is not currently available to newly hired fire and police employees and will not be available in the future.

(5) Before January 1, 1985, the city unsuccessfully litigated a limit to the cost-of-living adjustment that may be paid to members of the retirement system after their retirement.

(6) After July 1, 1985, the city conducted an election and a question authorizing the levying of an ad valorem property tax for the purpose of making payments in support of the retirement system received the affirmative votes of at least 60 percent of those voting on that question.

The proceeds of an ad valorem property tax rate levied pursuant to this subdivision shall be used only to pay for the obligations of a retirement system described by this subdivision. The proceeds shall not be used to finance more than 75 percent of the annual obligations of this retirement system. A city shall not levy an ad valorem property tax pursuant to this subdivision after June 30, 2034.

(d) (1) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2), if a jurisdiction imposes a rate in excess of the maximum rate authorized by subdivision (a), (b), or (c), the amount of property tax allocated to the jurisdiction pursuant to this chapter shall be reduced by one dollar ($1) for each one dollar ($1) of property tax revenue attributable to the excess rate. Any property tax revenue that has been subtracted from a jurisdiction’s allocation pursuant to this subdivision shall be allocated to elementary, high school, and unified school districts within the jurisdiction’s jurisdiction in proportion to the average daily attendance of each district.

(2) With respect to the ad valorem property taxes collected pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) in excess of the maximum rate authorized by subdivision (b) in the 2007–08, 2008–09, and 2009–10 fiscal years for the City of Bell, all of the following shall apply:

(A) (i) On or before December 31, 2010, the City of Bell shall pay to the County of Los Angeles an amount equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax collected pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) in excess of the maximum rate authorized by subdivision (b) in the 2007–08, 2008–09, and 2009–10 fiscal years, including interest thereon calculated at the average rate earned by the City of Bell on its idle funds in the 2007–08, 2008–09, and 2009–10 fiscal years.

(ii) From the amounts paid to the County of Los Angeles as required by clause (i), the County of Los Angeles shall make a refund to any taxpayer who paid the ad valorem property tax collected as specified in clause (i), in a manner generally consistent with the County of Los Angeles tax refund practices.

(B) (i) If, by December 31, 2011, the County of Los Angeles is unable to locate a taxpayer who paid the ad valorem property tax collected as specified in clause (i) of subparagraph (A) in order to make a refund to the taxpayer, those amounts remaining from those amounts paid to the County of Los Angeles pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be allocated to elementary, high school, and unified school districts as provided by paragraph (1).

(ii) The requirement of paragraph (1) shall apply only with respect to any amounts remaining after making refunds to taxpayers as provided by clause (i).

(C) The City of Bell shall reimburse the county auditor for the actual and reasonable costs incurred by the county to administer this subdivision, including applicable administrative overhead costs as permitted by federal Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87 standards.

(e) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, if a jurisdiction increases or extends, on or after January 1, 2012, a property tax rate as authorized by paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) or by subdivision (c), the county auditor shall, prior to the increase or extension of the property tax rate, verify that the rate increased or extended by the jurisdiction does not exceed the maximum rate authorized by this section.

(2) The jurisdiction shall provide the county auditor, in the form and manner and at the time prescribed by the county auditor, with any documentation that is necessary to assist the county auditor in making the verification required by paragraph (1).

(3) The county auditor shall reject the increase or extension of any property tax rate that exceeds the maximum rate authorized by paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) or by subdivision (c).

(4) The jurisdiction shall reimburse the county auditor for the actual and reasonable costs incurred by the county to administer this subdivision.

(f) This section shall be deemed to be a limit on the maximum property tax rate pursuant to Section 20 of Article XIII of the California Constitution.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 428, Sec. 1. (AB 1350) Effective January 1, 2012.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in the County of Santa Barbara for the Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District, the Montecito Fire Protection District, and the Orcutt Fire Protection District for the 1993–94 fiscal year through and including the 1996–97 fiscal year shall be deemed correct. However, commencing with the 1997–98 fiscal year, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenue for these fire protection districts in the County of Santa Barbara shall be determined on the basis of apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been corrected or adjusted as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentence.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 567, Sec. 2. Effective January 1, 2000.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in a county for which a Controller’s audit conducted under Section 12468 of the Government Code between July 1, 1993, and June 30, 2001, determined that an allocation method was required to be adjusted and a reallocation was required for prior fiscal years, are deemed to be correct. However, for the 2001-02 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, property tax apportionment factors applied in allocating property tax revenues in a county described in the preceding sentence shall be determined on the basis of property tax apportionment factors for prior fiscal years that have been fully corrected and adjusted, pursuant to the review and recommendation of the Controller, as would be required in the absence of the preceding sentence.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211, Sec. 19. Effective August 5, 2004.)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for each fiscal year for which this section is operative, the auditor for a county of the second class shall determine those amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to jurisdictions within that county in those amounts that would be determined if all of the following were true:

(1) Chapter 745 of the Statutes of 1995 had not been enacted.

(2) The amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated in the 1995–96 fiscal year to a flood control district or a harbors, beaches, and parks fund was reduced by four million dollars ($4,000,000).

(3) The amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated in the 1995–96 fiscal year was increased by the total amount of the reductions specified by paragraph (2).

(b) (1) For the fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which this section is operative, the auditor for a county of the second class shall allocate ad valorem property tax revenues to jurisdictions within the county in those amounts that would be determined if subdivision (a) had never applied to any preceding fiscal year.

(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no action shall be taken pursuant to this section that adversely affects any flood control project with respect to the Santa Ana River.

(c) This section is operative for each fiscal year beginning after the date on which a court of appellate jurisdiction renders a final determination invalidating Chapter 745 of the Statutes of 1995, and is inoperative for each fiscal year beginning after the date on which the Department of Finance determines that the amounts of property tax revenue transfers to a county of the second class made pursuant to Chapter 745 of the Statutes of 1995, and not repaid, together with the amounts of property tax revenue transfers to a county of the second class made pursuant to this section, equal the amounts of property tax revenue transfers to a county of the second class that would have been made pursuant to Chapter 745 of the Statutes of 1995 had it remained in full force and effect.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1998, Ch. 724, Sec. 8. Effective January 1, 1999. Section conditionally operative as provided in subd. (c).)

article: 2. Basic Revenue Allocations


citation: RTC § 97

text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the computations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, for the 1992–93 fiscal year only, shall be modified as follows:

(1) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated to the county or city and county in the prior fiscal year shall be reduced by an amount equal to one dollar and ninety-two cents ($1.92) per each resident of the county or city and county. In addition, the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each city or city and county shall be reduced by an amount equal to one dollar and sixty-five cents ($1.65) per each resident of that city or city and county.

(2) The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to the county, city and county, and any city as a result of the reductions calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, for purposes of the calculations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1, the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall be reduced by the total amount of the reductions required for each county or city and county and each city or city and county pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a).

(c) For the purpose of this section, the population of a city, county, or city and county shall be the population determined pursuant to Section 11005.

history: (History: Repealed and added by Stats. 1994, Ch. 1167, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 1995.)

path: 1. PROPERTY TAXATION > 0.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE XIII A OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION > 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue > 3. Revenue Allocation Shifts for Education


citation: RTC § 97.1

text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the computations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, as modified by Section 97.2 or its predecessor section for the 1992–93 fiscal year, shall be modified for the 1993–94 fiscal year as follows:

(1) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated to the county or city and county in the prior fiscal year shall be reduced by an amount equal to seventy-eight cents ($0.78) per each resident of the county or city and county. In addition, the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each city or city and county shall be reduced by an amount equal to ninety-nine cents ($0.99) per each resident of that city or city and county.

(2) The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to the county, city and county, and any city as a result of the reductions calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund established pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2.

(b) For the purpose of this section, the population of a city, county, or city and county shall be the population determined pursuant to Section 11005.

article: 3. Revenue Allocation Shifts for Education


citation: RTC § 97.2

text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the computations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section shall be modified for the 1992–93 fiscal year pursuant to subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, and for the 1997–98 and 1998–99 fiscal years pursuant to subdivision (e), as follows:

(a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each county shall be reduced by the dollar amounts indicated as follows, multiplied by 0.953649:Property Tax Reduction per CountyAlameda $ 27,323,576Alpine 5,169Amador 286,131Butte 846,452Calaveras 507,526Colusa 186,438Contra Costa 12,504,318Del Norte 46,523El Dorado 1,544,590Fresno 5,387,570Glenn 378,055Humboldt 1,084,968Imperial 998,222Inyo 366,402Kern 6,907,282Kings 1,303,774Lake 998,222Lassen93,045Los Angeles 244,178,806Madera 809,194Marin 3,902,258Mariposa 40,136Mendocino 1,004,112Merced 2,445,709Modoc 134,650Mono 319,793Monterey 2,519,507Napa 1,362,036Nevada762,585Orange 9,900,654Placer 1,991,265Plumas 71,076Riverside 7,575,353Sacramento 15,323,634San Benito 198,090San Bernardino 14,467,099San Diego 17,687,776San Francisco 53,266,991San Joaquin 8,574,869San Luis Obispo 2,547,990San Mateo 7,979,302Santa Barbara 4,411,812Santa Clara 20,103,706Santa Cruz 1,416,413Shasta 1,096,468Sierra 97,103Siskiyou 467,390Solano 5,378,048Sonoma 5,455,911Stanislaus 2,242,129Sutter 831,204Tehama 450,559Trinity 50,399Tulare 4,228,525Tuolumne 740,574Ventura 9,412,547Yolo 1,860,499Yuba 842,857(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the amount of the reduction specified in that paragraph for any county or city and county that has been materially and substantially impacted as a result of a federally declared disaster, as evidenced by at least 20 percent of the cities, or cities and unincorporated areas of the county representing 20 percent of the population within the county suffering substantial damage, as certified by the Director of Emergency Services, occurring between October 1, 1989, and September 30, 1994, shall be reduced by that portion of five million dollars ($5,000,000) determined for that county or city and county pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3).

(3) On or before October 1, 1992, the Director of Finance shall do all of the following:

(A) Determine the population of each county and city and county in which a federally declared disaster has occurred between October 1, 1989, and September 30, 1994.

(B) Determine for each county and city and county as described in subparagraph (A) its share of five million dollars ($5,000,000) on the basis of that county’s population relative to the total population of all counties described in subparagraph (A).

(C) Notify each auditor of each county and city and county of the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraph (B).

(b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each city, except for a newly incorporated city that did not receive property tax revenues in the 1991–92 fiscal year, shall be reduced by 9 percent. In making the above computation with respect to cities in Alameda County, the computation for a city described in paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 100.7, as added by Section 73.5 of Chapter 323 of the Statutes of 1983, shall be adjusted so that the amount multiplied by 9 percent is reduced by the amount determined for that city for “museums” pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 95.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the amount of the reduction determined pursuant to that paragraph for any city that has been materially and substantially impacted as a result of a federally declared disaster, as certified by the Director of Emergency Services, occurring between October 1, 1989, and September 30, 1994, shall be reduced by that portion of fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) determined for that city pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3).

(3) On or before October 1, 1992, the Director of Finance shall do all of the following:

(A) Determine the population of each city in which a federally declared disaster has occurred between October 1, 1989, and September 30, 1994.

(B) Determine for each city as described in subparagraph (A) its share of fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) on the basis of that city’s population relative to the total population of all cities described in subparagraph (A).

(C) Notify each auditor of each county and city and county of the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraph (B).

(4) In the 1992–93 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall adjust the computations required pursuant to Article 4 (commencing with Section 98) so that those computations do not result in the restoration of any reduction required pursuant to this section.

(c) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the amount of property tax revenue, other than those revenues that are pledged to debt service, deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to a special district, other than a multicounty district, a local hospital district, or a district governed by a city council or whose governing board has the same membership as a city council, shall be reduced by 35 percent. For purposes of this subdivision, “revenues that are pledged to debt service” include only those amounts required to pay debt service costs in the 1991–92 fiscal year on debt instruments issued by a special district for the acquisition of capital assets.

(2) No reduction pursuant to paragraph (1) for any special district, other than a countywide water agency that does not sell water at retail, shall exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of that district’s total annual revenues, from whatever source, as shown in the 1989–90 edition of the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts (not including any annual revenues from fiscal years following the 1989–90 fiscal year). With respect to any special district, as defined pursuant to subdivision (m) of Section 95, that is allocated property tax revenue pursuant to this chapter but does not appear in the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts, the auditor shall determine the total annual revenues for that special district from the information in the 1989–90 edition of the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Counties. With respect to a special district that did not exist in the 1989–90 fiscal year, the auditor may use information from the first full fiscal year, as appropriate, to determine the total annual revenues for that special district. No reduction pursuant to paragraph (1) for any countywide water agency that does not sell water at retail shall exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of that portion of that agency’s general fund derived from property tax revenues.

(3) The auditor in each county shall, on or before January 15, 1993, and on or before January 30 of each year thereafter, submit information to the Controller concerning the amount of the property tax revenue reduction to each special district within that county as a result of paragraphs (1) and (2). The Controller shall certify that the calculation of the property tax revenue reduction to each special district within that county is accurate and correct, and submit this information to the Director of Finance.

(A) The Director of Finance shall determine whether the total of the amounts of the property tax revenue reductions to special districts, as certified by the Controller, is equal to the amount that would be required to be allocated to school districts and community college districts as a result of a three hundred seventy-five million dollar ($375,000,000) shift of property tax revenues from special districts for the 1992–93 fiscal year. If, for any year, the total of the amount of the property tax revenue reductions to special districts is less than the amount as described in the preceding sentence, the amount of property tax revenue, other than those revenues that are pledged to debt service, deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to a special district, other than a multicounty district, a local hospital district, or a district governed by a city council or whose governing board has the same membership as a city council, shall, subject to subparagraph (B), be reduced by an amount up to 5 percent of the amount subject to reduction for that district pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2).

(B) No reduction pursuant to subparagraph (A), in conjunction with a reduction pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), for any special district, other than a countywide water agency that does not sell water at retail, shall exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of that district’s total annual revenues, from whatever source, as shown in the most recent State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts. No reduction pursuant to subparagraph (A), in conjunction with a reduction pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), for any countywide water agency that does not sell water at retail shall exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of that portion of that agency’s general fund derived from property tax revenues.

(C) In no event shall the amount of the property tax revenue loss to a special district derived pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (B) exceed 40 percent of that district’s property tax revenues or 10 percent of that district’s total revenues, from whatever source.

(4) For the purpose of determining the total annual revenues of a special district that provides fire protection or fire suppression services, all of the following shall be excluded from the determination of total annual revenues:

(A) If the district had less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) in total annual revenues in the 1991–92 fiscal year, the revenue generated by a fire suppression assessment levied pursuant to Article 3.6 (commencing with Section 50078) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the Government Code.

(B) The total amount of all funds, regardless of the source, that are appropriated to a district, including a fire department, by a board of supervisors pursuant to Section 25642 of the Government Code or Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 13890) of Part 2.7 of Division 12 of the Health and Safety Code for fire protection. The amendment of this subparagraph by Chapter 290 of the Statutes of 1997 does not affect any exclusion from the total annual revenues of a special district that was authorized by this subparagraph as it read before that amendment.

(C) The revenue received by a district as a result of contracts entered into pursuant to Section 4133 of the Public Resources Code.

(5) For the purpose of determining the total annual revenues of a resource conservation district, all of the following shall be excluded from the determination of total annual revenues:

(A) Any revenues received by that district from the state for financing the acquisition of land, or the construction or improvement of state projects, and for which that district serves as the fiscal agent in administering those state funds pursuant to an agreement entered into between that district and a state agency.

(B) Any amount received by that district as a private gift or donation.

(C) Any amount received as a county grant or contract as supplemental to, or independent of, that district’s property tax share.

(D) Any amount received by that district as a federal or state grant.

(d) (1) The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to the county, cities within the county, and special districts as a result of the reductions calculated pursuant to subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall instead be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to be established in each county. The amount of revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, derived from whatever source, shall be allocated pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and to community college districts, in total, in the same proportion that property tax revenues were distributed to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and community college districts, in total, during the 1991–92 fiscal year.

(2) (A) The auditor shall, based on information provided by the county superintendent of schools pursuant to this paragraph, allocate the proportion of the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to those school districts and county offices of education within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The county superintendent of schools shall determine the amount to be allocated to each school district and county office of education in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per average daily attendance in each school district and county office of education. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the fund to a school district or county office of education upon that school district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity.

(B) The Controller shall issue, on or before December 31, 2020, guidance to counties for implementation of subparagraph (A). Any guidance issued to counties pursuant to this subparagraph shall not be subject to the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) or Section 30200 of Government Code. Commencing with the 2019–20 fiscal year, if a county auditor-controller fails to allocate Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund revenues in accordance with the guidance issued by the Controller pursuant to this subparagraph, the Controller may request a writ of mandate to require the county auditor-controller to immediately perform this duty. Such actions may be filed only in the County of Sacramento and shall have priority over other civil matters.

(C) Calculations made pursuant to subparagraph (A) for fiscal years before the 2018–19 fiscal year shall be considered final as of the 2018–19 fiscal year second principal apportionment.

(D) Calculations pursuant to subparagraph (A) for the 2018–19 fiscal year shall be considered final as of the February 20, 2020, certification.

(3) The auditor shall, based on information provided by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges pursuant to this paragraph, allocate the proportion of the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to those community college districts within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The chancellor shall determine the amount to be allocated to each community college district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per funded full-time equivalent student in each community college district. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the fund to a community college district upon that district becoming an excess tax school entity.

(4) (A) If, after making the allocation required pursuant to paragraph (2), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (3). If, after making the allocation pursuant to paragraph (3), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (2).

(B) (i) (I) For the 1995–96 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall, subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), allocate those excess funds to the county superintendent of schools. Funds allocated pursuant to this subclause shall be counted as property tax revenues for special education programs in augmentation of the amount calculated pursuant to Section 2572 of the Education Code, to the extent that those property tax revenues offset state aid for county offices of education and school districts within the county pursuant to Section 56836.15 of the Education Code.

(II) For the 2007–08 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, both of the following apply:

(ia) In allocating the revenues described in subclause (I), the auditor shall apportion funds to the appropriate special education local plan area to cover the amount determined in Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.

(ib) Except as otherwise provided by sub-subclause (ia), property tax revenues described in subclause (I) shall not be apportioned to special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.

(III) If, for the 2000–01 fiscal year or any fiscal year thereafter, any additional revenues remain after the implementation of subclauses (I) and (II), the auditor shall allocate those remaining revenues among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year.

(IV) A county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall not be required to provide funding for special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education Code or any predecessor to that section for a fiscal year before the 2007–08 fiscal year that it has not already provided for these programs before the beginning of the 2007–08 fiscal year.

(ii) For the 1995–96 fiscal year only, clause (i) shall have no application to the County of Mono and the amount allocated pursuant to clause (i) in the County of Marin shall not exceed five million dollars ($5,000,000).

(iii) For the 1996–97 fiscal year only, the total amount of funds allocated by the auditor pursuant to clause (i) and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 shall not exceed that portion of two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) that corresponds to the county’s proportionate share of all moneys allocated pursuant to clause (i) and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 for the 1995–96 fiscal year. Upon the request of the auditor, the Department of Finance shall provide to the auditor all information in the department’s possession that is necessary for the auditor to comply with this clause.

(iv) Notwithstanding clause (i) of this subparagraph, for the 1999–2000 fiscal year only, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate the funds to the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year. The amount allocated pursuant to this clause shall not exceed eight million two hundred thirty-nine thousand dollars ($8,239,000), as appropriated in Item 6110-250-0001 of Section 2.00 of the Budget Act of 1999 (Chapter 50, Statutes of 1999). This clause shall be operative for the 1999–2000 fiscal year only to the extent that moneys are appropriated for purposes of this clause in the Budget Act of 1999 by an appropriation that specifically references this clause.

(C) For purposes of allocating the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the 1996–97 fiscal year, the auditor shall, after making the allocations for special education programs, if any, required by subparagraph (B), allocate all remaining funds among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year. For purposes of ad valorem property tax revenue allocations for the 1997–98 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, no amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the county, a city, or a special district pursuant to this subparagraph shall be deemed to be an amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that local agency in the prior fiscal year.

(5) For purposes of allocations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the amounts allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to this subdivision, other than amounts deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to Section 33681 of the Health and Safety Code, shall be deemed property tax revenue allocated to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in the prior fiscal year.

(e) (1) For the 1997–98 fiscal year:

(A) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to any city subject to the reduction specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) shall be reduced by an amount that is equal to the difference between the amount determined for the city pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the amount of the reduction determined for the city pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).

(B) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to any county or city and county subject to the reduction specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) shall be reduced by an amount that is equal to the difference between the amount specified for the county or city and county pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) and the amount of the reduction determined for the county or city and county pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a).

(2) The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to a city or city and county as a result of this subdivision shall be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (d).

(3) For purposes of allocations made pursuant to Section 96.1 for the 1998–99 fiscal year, the amounts allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to this subdivision shall be deemed property tax revenues allocated to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in the prior fiscal year.

(f) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section that this section supersede and be operative in place of Section 97.03 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, as added by Senate Bill 617 of the 1991–92 Regular Session.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 24, Sec. 84. (SB 98) Effective June 29, 2020.)


citation: RTC § 97.3

text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the computations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, as modified by Section 97.2 or its predecessor section for the 1992–93 fiscal year, shall be modified for the 1993–94 fiscal year pursuant to subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, as follows:

(a) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each county and city and county shall be reduced by an amount to be determined by the Director of Finance in accordance with the following:

(1) The total amount of the property tax reductions for counties and cities and counties determined pursuant to this section shall be one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollars ($1,998,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.

(2) The Director of Finance shall determine the amount of the reduction for each county or city and county as follows:

(A) The proportionate share of the property tax revenue reduction for each county or city and county that would have been imposed on all counties under the proposal specified in the “May Revision of the 1993–94 Governor’s Budget” shall be determined by reference to the document entitled “Estimated County Property Tax Transfers Under Governor’s May Revision Proposal,” published by the Legislative Analyst’s Office on June 1, 1993.

(B) Each county’s or city and county’s proportionate share of total taxable sales in all counties in the 1991–92 fiscal year shall be determined.

(C) An amount for each county and city and county shall be determined by applying its proportionate share determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) to the one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollar ($1,998,000,000) statewide reduction for counties and cities and counties.

(D) An amount for each county and city and county shall be determined by applying its proportionate share determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) to the one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollar ($1,998,000,000) statewide reduction for counties and cities and counties.

(E) The Director of Finance shall add the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraphs (C) and (D) for each county and city and county, and divide the resulting figure by two. The amount so determined for each county and city and county shall be divided by a factor of 1.038. The resulting figure shall be the amount of property tax revenue to be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year.

(3) The Director of Finance shall, by July 15, 1993, report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee its determination of the amounts determined pursuant to paragraph (2).

(4) On or before August 15, 1993, the Director of Finance shall notify the auditor of each county and city and county of the amount of property tax revenue reduction determined for each county and city and county.

(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, the amount of the reduction specified in paragraph (2) for any county or city and county that has first implemented, for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the alternative procedure for the distribution of property tax levies authorized by Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8 shall be reduced, for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, in the amount of any increased revenue allocated to each qualifying school entity that would not have been allocated for the 1993–94 fiscal year but for the implementation of that alternative procedure. For purposes of this paragraph, “qualifying school entity” means any school district, county office of education, or community college district that is not an excess tax school entity, as defined in Section 95, and a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, as described in subdivision (d) of this section and subdivision (d) of Section 97.2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, the amount of any reduction calculated pursuant to this paragraph for any county or city and county shall not exceed the reduction calculated for that county or city and county pursuant to paragraph (2).

(6) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (5), the amount of the reduction specified in paragraph (2) for a county of the 16th class that has first implemented, for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the alternative procedure for the distribution of property tax levies authorized by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8 shall be reduced, for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, in the amount of any increased revenue distributed to each qualifying school entity that would not have been distributed for the 1993–94 fiscal year, pursuant to the historical accounting method of that county of the 16th class, but for the implementation of that alternative procedure. For purposes of this paragraph, “qualifying school entity” means any school district, county office of education, or community college district that is not an excess tax school entity, as defined in Section 95, and a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, as described in subdivision (a) of this section and subdivision (d) of Section 97.2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, the amount of any reduction calculated pursuant to this paragraph for any county shall not exceed the reduction calculated for that county pursuant to paragraph (2).

(b) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each city shall be reduced by an amount to be determined by the Director of Finance in accordance with the following:

(1) The total amount of the property tax reductions determined for cities pursuant to this section shall be two hundred eighty-eight million dollars ($288,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.

(2) The Director of Finance shall determine the amount of reduction for each city as follows:

(A) The amount of property tax revenue that is estimated to be attributable in the 1993–94 fiscal year to the amount of each city’s state assistance payment received by that city pursuant to Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979 shall be determined.

(B) A factor for each city equal to the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) for that city, divided by the total of the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) for all cities, shall be determined.

(C) An amount for each city equal to the factor determined pursuant to subparagraph (B), multiplied by three hundred eighty-two million five hundred thousand dollars ($382,500,000), shall be determined.

(D) In no event shall the amount for any city determined pursuant to subparagraph (C) exceed a per capita amount of nineteen dollars and thirty-one cents ($19.31), as determined in accordance with that city’s population on January 1, 1993, as estimated by the Department of Finance.

(E) The amount determined for each city pursuant to subparagraphs (C) and (D) shall be the amount of property tax revenue to be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior year.

(3) The Director of Finance shall, by July 15, 1993, report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee those amounts determined pursuant to paragraph (2).

(4) On or before August 15, 1993, the Director of Finance shall notify each county auditor of the amount of property tax revenue reduction determined for each city located within that county.

(c) (1) The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each special district, as defined pursuant to subdivision (m) of Section 95, shall be reduced by the amount determined for the district pursuant to paragraph (3) and increased by the amount determined for the district pursuant to paragraph (4). The total net amount of these changes is intended to equal two hundred forty-four million dollars ($244,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.

(2) (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, no reduction shall be made pursuant to this subdivision with respect to any of the following special districts:

(i) A local hospital district, as described in Division 23 (commencing with Section 32000) of the Health and Safety Code.

(ii) A water agency that does not sell water at retail, but not including an agency the primary function of which, as determined on the basis of total revenues, is flood control.

(iii) A transit district.

(iv) A police protection district formed pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 20000) of Division 14 of the Health and Safety Code.

(v) A special district that was a multicounty special district as of July 1, 1979.

(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, the first one hundred four thousand dollars ($104,000) of the amount of any reduction that otherwise would be made under this subdivision with respect to a qualifying community services district shall be excluded. For purposes of this subparagraph, a “qualifying community services district” means a community services district that meets all of the following requirements:

(i) Was formed pursuant to Division 3 (commencing with Section 61000) of Title 6 of the Government Code.

(ii) Succeeded to the duties and properties of a police protection district upon the dissolution of that district.

(iii) Currently provides police protection services to substantially the same territory as did that district.

(iv) Is located within a county in which the board of supervisors has requested the Department of Finance that this subparagraph be operative in the county.

(3) (A) On or before September 15, 1993, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district equal to the amount of its allocation determined pursuant to Section 96 or 96.1, and Section 96.5 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year multiplied by the ratio determined pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of former Section 98.6, as that section read on June 15, 1993. In those counties that were subject to former Sections 98.66, 98.67, and 98.68, as those sections read on that same date, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocation determined pursuant to Section 96 or 96.1, and Section 96.5 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year that is attributed to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. In that county subject to Section 100.4, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocations determined pursuant to Section 96, 96.1, 96.5, or 100.4 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year that is attributable to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. In determining these amounts, the county auditor shall adjust for the influence of increased assessed valuation within each district, including the effect of jurisdictional changes, and the reductions in property tax allocations required in the 1992–93 fiscal year by Chapters 699 and 1369 of the Statutes of 1992. In the case of a special district that has been consolidated or reorganized, the auditor shall determine the amount of its current property tax allocation that is attributable to the prior district’s or districts’ receipt of state assistance payments pursuant to Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, for a special district that is governed by a city council or whose governing board has the same membership as a city council and that is a subsidiary district, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 16271 of the Government Code, the county auditor shall multiply the amount that otherwise would be calculated pursuant to this paragraph by 0.38 and the result shall be used in the calculations required by paragraph (5). In no event shall the amount determined by this paragraph be less than zero.

(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), commencing with the 1994–95 fiscal year, in the County of Sacramento, the auditor shall determine the amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocations determined pursuant to Section 96, 96.1, 96.5, or 100.6 for the 1994–95 fiscal year that is attributed to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979.

(4) (A) (i) On or before September 15, 1993, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that is engaged in fire protection activities, as reported to the Controller for inclusion in the 1989–90 edition of the Financial Transactions Report Concerning Special Districts under the heading of “Fire Protection,” that is equal to the amount of revenue allocated to that special district from the Special District Augmentation Fund for fire protection activities in the 1992–93 fiscal year. For purposes of the preceding sentence for counties of the second class, the phrase “amount of revenue allocated to that special district” means an amount of revenue that was identified for transfer to that special district, rather than the amount of revenue that was actually received by that special district pursuant to that transfer.

(ii) In the case of a special district, other than a special district governed by the county board of supervisors or whose governing body is the same as the county board of supervisors, that is engaged in fire protection activities as reported to the Controller, the county auditor shall also determine the amount by which the district’s amount determined pursuant to paragraph (3) exceeds the amount by which its allocation was reduced by operation of former Section 98.6 in the 1992–93 fiscal year. This amount shall be added to the amount otherwise determined for the district under this paragraph. In any county subject to former Section 98.65, 98.66, 98.67, or 98.68 in that same fiscal year, the county auditor shall determine for each special district that is engaged in fire protection activities an amount that is equal to the amount determined for that district pursuant to paragraph (3).

(B) For purposes of this paragraph, a special district includes any special district that is allocated property tax revenue pursuant to this chapter and does not appear in the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts, but is engaged in fire protection activities and appears in the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Counties.

(5) The total amount of property taxes allocated to special districts by the county auditor as a result of paragraph (4) shall be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenues not allocated to special districts by the county auditor as a result of paragraph (3) to determine the amount to be deposited in the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund as specified in subdivision (d).

(6) On or before September 30, 1993, the county auditor shall notify the Director of Finance of the net amount determined for special districts pursuant to paragraph (5).

(d) (1) The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to the county, city and county, cities within the county, and special districts as a result of the reductions required by subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall instead be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund established in each county or city and county pursuant to Section 97.2. The amount of revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, derived from whatever source, shall be allocated pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and to community college districts, in total, in the same proportion that property tax revenues were distributed to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and community college districts, in total, during the 1992–93 fiscal year.

(2) The county auditor shall, based on information provided by the county superintendent of schools pursuant to this paragraph, allocate that proportion of the revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to be allocated to school districts and county offices of education only to those school districts and county offices of education within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The county superintendent of schools shall determine the amount to be allocated to each school district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per average daily attendance in each school district. For each county office of education, the allocation shall be made based on the historical split of base property tax revenue between the county office of education and school districts within the county. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to a school district or county office of education upon that district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity. If, after determining the amount to be allocated to each school district and county office of education, the county superintendent of schools determines there are still additional funds to be allocated, the county superintendent of schools shall determine the remainder to be allocated in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue, excluding Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund moneys, per average daily attendance in each remaining school district, and on the basis of the historical split described above for each county office of education that is not an excess tax school entity, until all funds that would not result in a school district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated. The county superintendent of schools may determine the amounts to be allocated between each school district and county office of education to ensure that all funds that would not result in a school district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated.

(3) The county auditor shall, based on information provided by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges pursuant to this paragraph, allocate that proportion of the revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to be allocated to community college districts only to those community college districts within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The chancellor shall determine the amount to be allocated to each community college district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per funded full-time equivalent student in each community college district. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to a community college district upon that district becoming an excess tax school entity.

(4) (A) If, after making the allocation required pursuant to paragraph (2), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (3). If, after making the allocation pursuant to paragraph (3), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (2). If, after determining the amount to be allocated to each community college district, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges shall determine the remainder to be allocated to each community college district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue, excluding Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund moneys, per funded full-time equivalent student in each remaining community college district that is not an excess tax school entity until all funds that would not result in a community college district becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated.

(B) (i) (I) For the 1995–96 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall, subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), allocate those excess funds to the county superintendent of schools. Funds allocated pursuant to this subclause shall be counted as property tax revenues for special education programs in augmentation of the amount calculated pursuant to Section 2572 of the Education Code, to the extent that those property tax revenues offset state aid for county offices of education and school districts within the county pursuant to Section 56836.15 of the Education Code.

(II) For the 2007–08 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, both of the following apply:

(ia) In allocating the revenues described in subclause (I), the auditor shall apportion funds to the appropriate special education local plan area to cover the amount determined in Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.

(ib) Except as otherwise provided by sub-subclause (ia), property tax revenues described in subclause (I) shall not be apportioned to special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.

(III) If, for the 2000–01 fiscal year or any fiscal year thereafter, any additional revenues remain after the implementation of subclauses (I) and (II), the auditor shall allocate those remaining revenues among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year.

(IV) A county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall not be required to provide funding for special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education Code or any predecessor to that section for a fiscal year before the 2007–08 fiscal year that it has not already provided for these programs before the beginning of the 2007–08 fiscal year.

(ii) For the 1995–96 fiscal year only, clause (i) shall not apply to the County of Mono and the amount allocated pursuant to clause (i) in the County of Marin shall not exceed five million dollars ($5,000,000).

(iii) For the 1996–97 fiscal year only, the total amount of funds allocated by the auditor pursuant to clause (i) and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 shall not exceed that portion of two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) that corresponds to the county’s proportionate share of all moneys allocated pursuant to clause (i) and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 for the 1995–96 fiscal year. Upon the request of the auditor, the Department of Finance shall provide to the auditor all information in the department’s possession that is necessary for the auditor to comply with this clause.

(iv) Notwithstanding clause (i) of this subparagraph, for the 1999–2000 fiscal year only, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate the funds to the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year. The amount allocated pursuant to this clause shall not exceed eight million two hundred thirty-nine thousand dollars ($8,239,000), as appropriated in Item 6110-250-0001 of Section 2.00 of the Budget Act of 1999 (Chapter 50, Statutes of 1999).

(C) For purposes of allocating the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the 1996–97 fiscal year, the auditor shall, after making the allocations for special education programs, if any, required by subparagraph (B), allocate all remaining funds among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year. For purposes of ad valorem property tax revenue allocations for the 1997–98 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, no amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the county, a city, or a special district pursuant to this subparagraph shall be deemed to be an amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that local agency in the prior fiscal year.

(5) For purposes of allocations made pursuant to Section 96.1 for the 1994–95 fiscal year, the amounts allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to this subdivision, other than those amounts deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to any provision of the Health and Safety Code, shall be deemed property tax revenue allocated to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in the prior fiscal year.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 24, Sec. 85. (SB 98) Effective June 29, 2020.)


citation: RTC § 97.4

text:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 97.2 or 97.3 or any other provision of this chapter, in implementing the changes in allocations of property tax revenues required by Sections 97, 97.1, 97.2, and 97.3, the county auditor may elect to determine and give effect to the changes in allocations of property tax revenues required by Sections 97, 97.1, 97.2, and 97.3 on a countywide, rather than tax rate area, basis. If the county auditor so elects, he or she shall ensure adequate recognition of year-to-year revenue growth so that the results of changes implemented on a countywide basis do not differ materially from the results which would be obtained from the use of a tax rate area basis.

(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the 1992–93 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, in any county in which property tax increment revenues are allocated to a redevelopment agency pursuant to Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code, the county auditor shall deposit in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund an amount that is equal to the total amount of revenues that would be so deposited pursuant to Sections 97, 97.1, 97.2, and 97.3 if no reduction were made in that amount of revenues for purposes of allocations to a redevelopment agency pursuant to Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code. Those revenues deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in accordance with this paragraph shall be allocated or transferred only to school districts, county offices of education, or community college districts, in accordance with subdivision (d) of either Section 97.2 or 97.3.

(2) The deposit of property tax revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in accordance with paragraph (1) shall not reduce or otherwise affect the amount of property tax revenue to be allocated to a redevelopment agency pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code, and any additional amount required to be allocated to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be deducted from those amounts allocated to the county, cities, and special districts with respect to each tax rate area in which property tax increment revenues are allocated to a redevelopment agency. These reductions shall be made in proportion to the total amount of the reductions required with respect to the county and each city and special district in each of these redevelopment agency tax rate areas under Sections 97, 97.1, 97.2, and 97.3.

(3) This subdivision shall not require the modification of any property tax revenue allocation that was made by the county auditor for the 1992–93 fiscal year in a manner inconsistent with paragraph (1) or (2), if that allocation was implemented on or before June 30, 1993. However, property tax revenue allocations made in the 1993–94 fiscal year and any fiscal year thereafter shall be determined by the county auditor as if the allocations made for the 1992–93 fiscal year had been made in a manner consistent with paragraph (1).


text:
For the purpose of determining under Section 97.2 the total annual revenues of a special district that provides fire protection or fire suppression services and had less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) in total annual revenues in the 1991–92 fiscal year, all of the following shall, in addition to any other revenues otherwise excluded, be excluded from the determination of total annual revenues:

(a) The revenue generated by a special tax levied pursuant to Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 50075) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the Government Code.

(b) The revenue generated by a special tax levied pursuant to Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code.

(c) The revenue generated by a special tax levied pursuant to Article 16 (commencing with Section 53970) of Chapter 4 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code.


text: For the purposes of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 97.2, “multicounty district” includes District 2 of the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District. This section shall be deemed to have become operative July 1, 1992, and the auditor is hereby authorized to adjust the 1993–94 distributions to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund accordingly.


text:
(a) Notwithstanding Section 97.2 or any successor to that section, the Chino Basin Municipal Water District may maintain a stream of property tax revenue as provided in former Section 97.03, as that section read on October 11, 1993, to meet the commitment of debt service obligated with respect to revenue bonds that were issued in accordance with Chapter 1279 of the Statutes of 1993, on or after the effective date of that act and prior to the effective date of Chapter 155 of the Statutes of 1994.

(b) (1) In no event shall the total amount of the revenue stream maintained by the Chino Basin Municipal Water District pursuant to subdivision (a) exceed the total amount of the annual debt service payments for those revenue bonds described in subdivision (a).

(2) If the total amount of the revenue stream maintained by the Chino Basin Municipal Water District pursuant to subdivision (a) exceeds the total amount of the annual debt service payments for those revenue bonds described in subdivision (a), then the Chino Basin Municipal Water District shall reimburse the excess amount to the county auditor for deposit into the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund.

(c) This section shall remain in effect only until the date upon which the revenue bonds described in subdivision (a) have been fully amortized, and as of that date is repealed.

history: (History: Repealed and added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 39, Sec. 2. Effective January 1, 1996. Repealed as of date prescribed by its own provisions.)


text:
(a) (1) The Director of Finance shall direct the county auditor to reduce, in the 1993–94 fiscal year, the amount of the transfer to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund determined pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 97.3 for any eligible county in accordance with subdivision (b) of this section, and also shall direct the county auditor to reduce, in the 1993–94 fiscal year, the amount of that transfer for certain counties in accordance with subdivision (c). The total amount of the reductions for all counties made for the 1993–94 fiscal year pursuant to subdivision (b) shall not exceed two million dollars ($2,000,000). For the 1994–95 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, ad valorem property tax revenue allocations made pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 96.1 shall fully incorporate the adjustments required by this section.

(2) For purposes of this section, an “eligible county” is a county with a population of less than 350,000, as reported in the 1990 federal census that had a fire element of the tax bill in 1977–78, that continues to fund some portion of those costs from the county general fund in 1993–94, and that provides these services in the same manner as a special district less than countywide and has so indicated in the Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Counties.

(b) (1) For each eligible county, the county auditor may submit the following information to the Director of Finance not later than November 1, 1993:

(A) The amount of property tax allocated to the county fire district in the 1977–78 fiscal year.

(B) The amount allocated from the county budget to the county fire district in the 1978–79 fiscal year.

(C) The amount of property tax reduction for the county fire district attributable to the passage of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution by the voters in the primary election in June 1978.

(D) The amount of money allocated from the county budget to the county fire district in the 1993–94 fiscal year.

(E) The amount allocated to the county fire district from the Special District Augmentation Fund in the 1992–93 fiscal year.

(2) For each eligible county that submits to the Director of Finance by November 1, 1993, the information described in paragraph (1), the Director of Finance shall make the following calculations:

(A) Multiply the amount of property tax allocated to the county fire district in the 1977–78 fiscal year by the change in the value of the property tax base for the county from the 1977–78 fiscal year to the 1978–79 fiscal year.

(B) Subtract the amount reported pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) from the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (A).

(C) Multiply the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) by an amount determined by the Director of Finance to be the change in assessed value for the county from the 1978–79 fiscal year to the 1993–94 fiscal year.

(D) Multiply the amount reported pursuant to subparagraph (E) of paragraph (1) by 1.038.

(E) Add the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (C) to the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (D).

(F) Subtract the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (E) from the amount reported pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1).

(3) The Director of Finance shall determine the sum of all the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2).

(4) If the sum determined pursuant to paragraph (3) is greater than two million dollars ($2,000,000), then the Director of Finance shall proportionately reduce the amount for each county so that the total of the amounts for all counties does not exceed two million dollars ($2,000,000). If the sum determined pursuant to subdivision (e) does not exceed two million dollars ($2,000,000), then the Director of Finance shall not reduce the amount determined for each county.

(5) The Director of Finance shall by January 15, 1994, notify each county of its reduction in the amount to be transferred to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 97.3. The maximum amount of the reduction that may be authorized pursuant to this subdivision is one-half the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2).

(c) The amount to be transferred from a county to an Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 97.3 shall be reduced by one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for the County of Madera and by two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) for the County of Tulare.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211, Sec. 20. Effective August 5, 2004.)


text: Notwithstanding Section 97.3, a special district does not include, for purposes of the reductions required by that section, a memorial district formed pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 1170) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 6 of the Military and Veteran’s Code.


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the amounts of property tax revenue that are required to be shifted pursuant to Section 97.3 from a city described in the second clause of paragraph (2) of subdivision (h) of Section 95 or a city described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 16700 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and from the county in which those cities are located, to the Educational Relief Augmentation Fund, shall each be reduced by an amount equal to the sum of the property tax revenue loss incurred by the city or county as a result of the Oakland/Berkeley fire that occurred in October 1991. The auditor shall certify to the Department of Finance the amount of the property tax revenue loss for each city and the county as a result of those properties that were reassessed as a result of that fire. The property tax revenue loss shall be the difference between the property tax revenues, including property tax revenue attributable to tax rates levied pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, that would have been derived based on the original assessed value of those properties for the 1991–92 fiscal year prior to any reassessment for disaster relief, increased by 2 percent, and the property tax revenues derived from the assessed value of those properties for the 1992–93 fiscal year.

(b) In each of the 1994–95, 1995–96, and 1996–97 fiscal years, for the county and cities described in subdivision (a), one-third of the adjustments made pursuant to subdivision (a) for each described city and the county shall be added to the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated to each city and the county in the prior fiscal year.


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the amount of the revenue reduction resulting from the application of subdivision (c) of Section 97.2 to an amount equal to the amount of the water quality control compliance costs of a qualified special district for the 1992–93 fiscal year shall, for purposes of property tax revenue allocations for the 1993–94 fiscal year, be added to the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated to that district in the 1992–93 fiscal year. The water quality control compliance costs of a qualified special district for the relevant fiscal year shall also be deducted from the amount of property tax revenue subject to reduction with respect to that district under Section 97.3 for the 1993–94 fiscal year, and under any statute with respect to any subsequent fiscal year that would reduce the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to that district for purposes of increasing the amount of property tax revenue to be allocated to another jurisdiction.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) A “qualified special district” means any special district that is required to comply with Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 13950) of Division 7 of the Water Code.

(2) “Water quality control compliance costs” mean those costs, including, but not limited to, reserves for nongrowth facility augmentation and replacement and environmental protection, that are determined by the county auditor in accordance with subdivision (a) to have been incurred by a qualified special district in complying with Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 13950) of Division 7 of the Water Code.

(c) The auditor may assess each qualified special district its share of the auditor’s actual and reasonable costs of complying with this section. For purposes of this subdivision, each share of costs shall be determined in accordance with that district’s proportional share of the total amount of water quality control compliance costs determined by the auditor for purposes of this section for each fiscal year.


text: Notwithstanding Section 97.3, the amount of property tax revenues of a community service district that is subject to reduction pursuant to that section shall not include those property tax revenues, up to the amount of ninety thousand dollars ($90,000), that are allocated by that district to “police protection and personal safety” activities, as indicated in the 1989–90 edition of the State Controller’s Report on the Financial Transactions of Special Districts in California.


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for the designated fiscal year, the amount of the revenue allocation reduction with respect to a qualified county that is attributable in that fiscal year to the reduction determined for that county for the 1993–94 fiscal year pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 97.3 or its predecessor section shall be reduced by the amount of any increased revenues, allocated in the designated fiscal year in that county to a “qualifying school entity” as defined in paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 97.3 or its predecessor section, that would not have been so allocated but for that county being a qualified county.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) A “qualified county” means a county or city or county that has first implemented for the 1994–95 or any subsequent fiscal year the alternative procedure for the distribution of property tax levies that is authorized by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8.

(2) For purposes of this section,“designated fiscal year” means the fiscal year in which the relevant qualified county first implemented the alternative method for the distribution of property tax levies that is authorized by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1996, Ch. 1058, Sec. 1. Effective September 30, 1996.)


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for the 1994–95 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to a county free library system, or a library established as an independent special district, shall not be reduced for purposes of increasing the amount of property tax revenue to be allocated to another jurisdiction. This section does not apply to any adjustments in property tax allocations made pursuant to Section 19116 of the Education Code.

(b) (1) This section shall not be construed to preclude allocations of ad valorem property tax revenue to a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, rather than to a county free library system or a library established as an independent special district, that are required by the application to a library system or library district, as so described, of Sections 97.2 and 97.3. The Legislature finds and declares that this paragraph does not constitute a change in, but is declaratory of, existing law.

(2) This section does not apply to any adjustments in property tax allocations made pursuant to Section 19116 of the Education Code.

(c) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for those county free library systems from which the auditor had not shifted ad valorem property tax revenue to an Education Revenue Augmentation Fund as of January 1, 1996, all of the following shall apply:

(A) No allocation of ad valorem property tax revenue to a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall be required from a county free library system that did not levy a property tax rate separate from the property tax rate of the county for the 1975–76, 1976–77, and 1977–78 fiscal years, was not entitled to an allocation of property tax revenue for the 1978–79 and 1979–80 fiscal years, and did not receive state assistance payments pursuant to Section 16260, 26912, or 26912.1 of the Government Code.

(B) No allocation of ad valorem property tax revenue to a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall be required from a county free library system that, for the 1977–78 fiscal year, was organized as a joint powers agency pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code.

(C) A county free library system established pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 19100) of Chapter 6 of Part 11 of Division 1 of Title 1 of the Education Code, for which a separate property tax rate was levied in the 1977–78 fiscal year, shall be considered a special district. However, any county free library system that was not actually allocated property tax revenues pursuant to this chapter for the 1992–93 fiscal year and any portion of the 1993–94 fiscal year shall not be considered a special district for any purpose in the 1992–93 fiscal year and that portion of the 1993–94 fiscal year for which those revenues were not allocated.

(2) The Legislature finds and declares that this subdivision does not constitute a change in, but is declaratory of, existing law.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1997, Ch. 786, Sec. 1. Effective October 8, 1997.)