text: Notwithstanding any contrary provision in paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 , for the County of Marin , commencing with the 1993–94 fiscal year, and for the County of Mono, commencing with the 1994-95 fiscal year, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 as required by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 and after making the allocation pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3, the auditor determines that each community college district located entirely within that county is an excess school tax entity as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95, the auditor shall then apply any remaining funds to decrease the amounts of those reductions calculated pursuant to Section 97.3 with respect to the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amount of the reduction otherwise calculated under Section 97.3 for each of those agencies.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1995, Ch. 500, Sec. 3. Effective October 4, 1995.)


kind: section

code: RTC

text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the amount of each allocation that was made to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund of the County of Santa Clara in any fiscal year, up to and including the 1996–97 fiscal year, as the result of a reduction amount calculated pursuant to Section 97.2 or 97.3 for the Los Altos County Fire Protection District, the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, the Saratoga Fire Protection District, or the South Santa Clara County Fire District, shall be deemed correct.

(b) No reduction or correction may be made, in response to a calculation error, to an allocation that was made to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund of the County of Santa Clara in any fiscal year, up to and including the 1996–97 fiscal year, as the result of a reduction amount calculated pursuant to Section 97.2 or 97.3 for a County of Santa Clara fire district listed in subdivision (a). However, in the 1997–98 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, each allocation that is made to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund of the County of Santa Clara as the result of a reduction amount calculated pursuant to Section 97.2 or 97.3 for a County of Santa Clara fire district listed in subdivision (a) shall be made in that amount that fully reflects any reduction or correction that would be required to be made to a corresponding allocation in a prior fiscal year in the absence of this section.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 567, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 2000.)

division: 1. PROPERTY TAXATION

chapter: 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue

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


text:
(a) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, commencing with the 1995–96 fiscal year, the auditor shall allocate property tax revenue to a qualifying county service area, as defined in subdivision (b), in those amounts that would be determined if the amount of the reduction calculated for that county service area pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 97.3 had been decreased by an amount that is equal to that fraction specified in paragraph (2) of the amount of revenue allocated to that county service area from the county’s Special District Augmentation Fund for police protection activities in the 1992–93 fiscal year.

(2) For purposes of implementing paragraph (1), the applicable fractions are as follows:

(A) For the 1995–96 fiscal year, one-third.

(B) For the 1996–97 fiscal year, two-thirds.

(C) For the 1997–98 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the entire amount.

(b) For purposes of this section, “qualifying county service area” means a county service area that was formed prior to July 1, 1994, pursuant to the County Service Area Law (Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 25210) of Part 2 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code) and that is either of the following:

(1) A county service area, the governing board of which is the board of supervisors, that is engaged in police 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 “Police Protection and Public Safety.”

(2) A county service area, the sole purpose of which is to engage in police protection activities.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2008, Ch. 158, Sec. 16. Effective January 1, 2009.)

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

article: 3. Revenue Allocation Shifts for Education


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, in the County of San Luis Obispo, commencing with ad valorem property tax revenue allocations for the 1995–96 fiscal year, the auditor shall, subject to subdivision (b), do both of the following:

(1) Allocate to the County of San Luis Obispo, from those revenues that are otherwise required to be allocated to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF), that amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is attributable in the relevant fiscal year to three million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($3,750,000) of ad valorem property tax revenue derived for the 1993–94 fiscal year from the taxation of property assessed by the County of San Luis Obispo for that fiscal year.

(2) Transfer from the county to that county’s ERAF that amount of revenue, otherwise to be allocated to the county pursuant to Section 100, that is attributable in the relevant fiscal year to three million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($3,750,000) of ad valorem property tax revenue derived for the 1993–94 fiscal year with respect to the County of San Luis Obispo from the taxation of property assessed by the State Board of Equalization.

(b) The allocations and transfers of revenue required by subdivision (a) are modifications of, and shall not be construed to be substitutions for, the allocation of property tax revenues as otherwise required by this chapter.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 501, Sec. 4. Effective October 4, 1995.)


text:
Notwithstanding subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and subdivision (d) of Section 97.3, the amount deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to Section 33681.9 of the Health and Safety Code, if that section is added by Senate Bill 1045 of the 2003–04 Regular Session, shall be allocated as follows:

(a) To county offices, the amount that would be allocated pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 multiplied by 1.85185.

(b) To community colleges, the amount that would be allocated pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 multiplied by 1.85185.

(c) To school districts the remainder after the allocations made in subdivisions (a) and (b).

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2003, Ch. 552, Sec. 37. Effective January 1, 2004.)


text:
Notwithstanding subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and subdivision (d) of Section 97.3, the revenue deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to Section 33681.9 of the Health and Safety Code shall be allocated as follows:

(a) To county offices of education, the amount of those revenues that would be allocated pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 multiplied by 1.85185.

(b) To community college districts, the amount of those revenues that would be allocated pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 and paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3 multiplied by 1.85185.

(c) To school districts the remainder after the allocations made in subdivisions (a) and (b).

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2003, Ch. 757, Sec. 10. Effective January 1, 2004.)


text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in allocating ad valorem property tax revenue allocations for each fiscal year during the fiscal adjustment period, all of the following apply:

(a) (1) The total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be allocated to a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall be reduced by the countywide adjustment amount.

(2) The countywide adjustment amount shall be deposited in a Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund that shall be established in the treasury of each county.

(b) For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:

(1) “Fiscal adjustment period” means the period beginning with the 2004–05 fiscal year and continuing through the later of either of the following:

(A) The fiscal year in which the Director of Finance notifies the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 99006 of the Government Code.

(B) The fiscal year in which an additional countywide adjustment amount, as described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (d), is determined.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (d), the “countywide adjustment amount” means the combined total revenue loss of the county and each city in the county that is annually estimated by the Director of Finance, based upon the actual amount of sales and use tax revenues transmitted under Section 7204 in that county in the prior fiscal year and any projected growth on that amount for the current fiscal year as determined by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and reported to the director on or before August 15 of each fiscal year during the fiscal adjustment period, to result for each of those fiscal years from the 0.25-percent reduction in local sales and use rate tax authority applied by Section 7203.1. The director shall adjust the estimates described in this paragraph if the board reports to them any changes in the projected growth in local sales and use tax revenues for the current fiscal year.

(3) “In lieu local sales and use tax revenues” means those revenues that are transferred under this section to a county or a city from a Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund or an Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund.

(c) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (d), for each fiscal year during the fiscal adjustment period, in lieu sales and use tax revenues in the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund shall be allocated among the county and the cities in the county, and those allocations shall be subsequently adjusted, as follows:

(1) The Director of Finance shall, on or before September 1 of each fiscal year during the fiscal adjustment period, notify each county auditor of that portion of the countywide adjustment amount for that fiscal year that is attributable to the county and to each city within that county.

(2) The county auditor shall allocate revenues in the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund among the county and cities in the county in the amounts described in paragraph (1). The auditor shall allocate one-half of the amount described in paragraph (1) in each January during the fiscal adjustment period and shall allocate the balance of that amount in each May during the fiscal adjustment period.

(3) After the end of each fiscal year during the fiscal adjustment period, other than a fiscal year subject to subdivision (d), the Director of Finance shall, based on the actual amount of sales and use tax revenues that were not transmitted for the prior fiscal year, recalculate each amount estimated under paragraph (1) and notify the county auditor of the recalculated amount.

(4) If the amount recalculated under paragraph (3) for the county or any city in the county is greater than the amount allocated to that local agency under paragraph (2), the county auditor shall, in the fiscal year next following the fiscal year for which the allocation was made, transfer an amount of ad valorem property tax revenue equal to this difference from the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund to that local agency.

(5) If the amount recalculated under paragraph (3) for the county or any city in the county is less than the amount allocated to that local agency under paragraph (2), the county auditor shall, in the fiscal year next following the fiscal year for which the allocation was made, reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise allocated to that city or county from the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund by an amount equal to this difference and instead allocate this difference to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund.

(6) If there is an insufficient amount of moneys in a county’s Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund to make the transfers required by paragraph (4), the county auditor shall transfer from the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund an amount sufficient to make the full amount of these transfers.

(d) (1) At such time as the Director of Finance estimates that the notification described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) is likely to occur within the subsequent 12 months, the director shall, at the beginning of each subsequent calendar year quarter, determine the month in which the notification will occur.

(2) (A) In the calendar year quarter in which the Director of Finance determines that the notification described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) will occur within either the current or subsequent quarter, the director shall revise the countywide adjustment amount described in subdivision (c) for the current fiscal year such that the countywide adjustment amount is calculated only through the quarter in which the director gives notification pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b). The director, when appropriate, may revise the countywide adjustment amount described in subdivision (c) for the subsequent fiscal year such that the countywide adjustment amount described in subdivision (c) is calculated only through the quarter in which the director gives notification pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).

(B) If the determination regarding the notification described in subparagraph (A) is revised, the countywide adjustment amount calculated in subparagraph (A) for either the current or the subsequent fiscal year shall be recalculated such that the countywide adjustment amount described in subdivision (c) is calculated only through the quarter in which the Director of Finance gives notification pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).

(3) (A) After the end of the revenue exchange period, the Director of Finance shall do both of the following:

(i) Provide to the Controller, with a copy to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, a schedule providing for a transfer from the Fiscal Recovery Fund, established pursuant to Section 99008 of the Government Code, to the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund of either of the following amounts:

(I) An amount equal to the local sales and use tax revenue not received by the county and each city in the county during the revenue exchange period as a result of the 0.25-percent reduction in local sales and use tax authority applied by Section 7203.1 minus the sum of all countywide adjustment amounts deposited during the revenue exchange period, as determined by the director. This amount shall be summed over all counties.

(II) If the amount summed over all counties in subclause (I) is greater than the difference between the balance in the Fiscal Recovery Fund and an amount sufficient to cover the estimated costs associated with closing the Fiscal Recovery Fund, then a proportion shall be calculated equal to the proportion between the amount in subclause (I) summed over all counties and an amount equal to the difference between the balance in the Fiscal Recovery Fund and an amount sufficient to cover the estimated costs associated with closing the Fiscal Recovery Fund. The amount calculated under this subclause is equal to the product of the amount calculated in subclause (I) and the proportion calculated in this subclause.

(ii) Provide a schedule to the auditor of each county of the amounts calculated under clause (i).

(B) If the amount provided for in the schedule required pursuant to clause (i) of subparagraph (A) is the amount that is described in subclause (II) of clause (i) of subparagraph (A), an amount equal to the difference between the amount that is described in subclause (I) of clause (i) of subparagraph (A) and the amount that is described in subclause (II) of clause (i) of subparagraph (A) shall constitute an additional countywide adjustment amount to be applied in the manner prescribed in subdivision (a) for either the current or subsequent fiscal year, as determined by the director.

(4) The Controller shall transfer, from the Fiscal Recovery Fund to the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund for each county, the amount specified for that county in the schedule provided by the Director of Finance pursuant to clause (i) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3).

(5) Within 60 days of the transfer by the Controller of revenues from the Fiscal Recovery Fund to the Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund for each county, each county auditor shall allocate revenue to the county and each city in the county per the schedule provided by the Director of Finance pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3).

(6) For purposes of this subdivision, “revenue exchange period” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 7203.1.

(e) For the 2005–06 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, may not reflect any portion of any property tax revenue allocation required by this section for a preceding fiscal year.

(f) This section may not be construed to do any of the following:

(1) Reduce any allocations of excess, additional, or remaining funds that would otherwise have been allocated to cities, counties, cities and counties, or special districts pursuant to clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2, clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.3, or Article 4 (commencing with Section 98), had this section not been enacted. The allocation made pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (c) shall be adjusted to comply with this paragraph.

(2) Require an increased ad valorem property tax revenue allocation to a community redevelopment agency.

(3) Alter the manner in which ad valorem property tax revenue growth from fiscal year to fiscal year is determined or allocated in a county.

(g) Existing tax exchange or revenue sharing agreements, entered into prior to the operative date of this section, between local agencies or between local agencies and nonlocal agencies shall be deemed to be temporarily modified to account for the reduced sales and use tax revenues, resulting from the temporary reduction in the local sales and use tax rate, with those reduced revenues to be replaced in kind by property tax revenue from a Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund or an Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, on a temporary basis, as provided by this section.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 451, Sec. 1. (SB 1494) Effective January 1, 2023.)


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, in allocating ad valorem property tax revenues to a Sales and Use Tax Compensation Fund under Section 97.68 or a Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund under Section 97.70, the auditor shall not allocate to those funds the revenues from delinquent and uncollected property taxes on the secured roll that have been pledged or contractually obligated to debt service repayment under Section 6516.6 of the Government Code.

(b) In implementing subdivision (a), the auditor shall proportionally increase, using nondelinquent ad valorem property tax revenues, the total amount of the ad valorem property tax revenue reduction, otherwise required by Sections 97.68 and 97.70, for all school entities in the county that have pledged or contractually obligated to debt service repayment revenues from delinquent and uncollected property taxes on the secured roll, by an amount equal to the total amount excluded under subdivision (a) to ensure that there is no reduction in the total amount of the countywide adjustment amount, as defined in Section 97.68, or the total amount of the countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined in Section 97.70, for any fiscal year.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2006, Ch. 366, Sec. 2. Effective January 1, 2007.)


text:
Notwithstanding any other law, for the 2004–05 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, all of the following apply:

(a) (1) (A) The auditor shall reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund by the countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount.

(B) If, for the fiscal year, after complying with Section 97.68 there is not enough ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to a county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the auditor to complete the allocation reduction required by subparagraph (A), the auditor shall additionally reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to all school districts and community college districts in the county for that fiscal year by an amount equal to the difference between the countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount and the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for that fiscal year. This reduction for each school district and community college district in the county shall be the percentage share of the total reduction that is equal to the proportion that the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to the school district or community college district bears to the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to all school districts and community college districts in a county. For purposes of this subparagraph, “school districts” and “community college districts” do not include any districts that are excess tax school entities, as defined in Section 95.

(2) The countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount shall be allocated to the Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund that shall be established in the treasury of each county.

(b) (1) The auditor shall allocate moneys in the Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund according to the following:

(A) Each city in the county shall receive its vehicle license fee adjustment amount.

(B) Each county and city and county shall receive its vehicle license fee adjustment amount.

(2) The auditor shall allocate one-half of the amount specified in paragraph (1) on or before January 31 of each fiscal year, and the other one-half on or before May 31 of each fiscal year.

(c) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:

(1) “Vehicle license fee adjustment amount” for a particular city, county, or a city and county means, subject to an adjustment under paragraph (2) and Section 97.71, all of the following:

(A) For the 2004–05 fiscal year, an amount equal to the difference between the following two amounts:

(i) The estimated total amount of revenue that would have been deposited to the credit of the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund, including any amounts that would have been certified to the Controller by the auditor of the County of Ventura under subdivision (j) of Section 98.02, as that section read on January 1, 2004, for distribution under the law as it read on January 1, 2004, to the county, city and county, or city for the 2004–05 fiscal year if the fee otherwise due under the Vehicle License Fee Law (Part 5 (commencing with Section 10701) of Division 2) was 2 percent of the market value of a vehicle, as specified in Sections 10752 and 10752.1 as those sections read on January 1, 2004.

(ii) The estimated total amount of revenue that is required to be distributed from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund to the county, city and county, and each city in the county for the 2004–05 fiscal year under Section 11005, as that section read on the operative date of the act that amended this clause.

(B) (i) Subject to an adjustment under clause (ii), for the 2005–06 fiscal year, the sum of the following two amounts:

(I) The difference between the following two amounts:

(ia) The actual total amount of revenue that would have been deposited to the credit of the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund, including any amounts that would have been certified to the Controller by the auditor of the County of Ventura under subdivision (j) of Section 98.02, as that section read on January 1, 2004, for distribution under the law as it read on January 1, 2004, to the county, city and county, or city for the 2004–05 fiscal year if the fee otherwise due under the Vehicle License Fee Law (Part 5 (commencing with Section 10701) of Division 2) was 2 percent of the market value of a vehicle, as specified in Sections 10752 and 10752.1 as those sections read on January 1, 2004.

(ib) The actual total amount of revenue that was distributed from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund to the county, city and county, and each city in the county for the 2004–05 fiscal year under Section 11005, as that section read on the operative date of the act that amended this subsubclause.

(II) The product of the following two amounts:

(ia) The amount described in subclause (I).

(ib) The percentage change from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity, as reflected in the equalized assessment roll for those fiscal years. For the first fiscal year for which a change in a city’s jurisdictional boundaries first applies, the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year shall be calculated solely on the basis of the city’s previous jurisdictional boundaries, without regard to the change in that city’s jurisdictional boundaries. For each following fiscal year, the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year shall be calculated on the basis of the city’s current jurisdictional boundaries.

(ii) The amount described in clause (i) shall be adjusted as follows:

(I) If the amount described in subclause (I) of clause (i) for a particular city, county, or city and county is greater than the amount described in subparagraph (A) for that city, county, or city and county, the amount described in clause (i) shall be increased by an amount equal to this difference.

(II) If the amount described in subclause (I) of clause (i) for a particular city, county, or city and county is less than the amount described in subparagraph (A) for that city, county, or city and county, the amount described in clause (i) shall be decreased by an amount equal to this difference.

(C) For the 2006–07 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, the sum of the following two amounts:

(i) The vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year, if Section 97.71 and clause (ii) of subparagraph (B) did not apply for that fiscal year, for that city, county, and city and county.

(ii) The product of the following two amounts:

(I) The amount described in clause (i).

(II) The percentage change from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity, as reflected in the equalized assessment roll for those fiscal years. For the first fiscal year for which a change in a city’s jurisdictional boundaries first applies, the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year shall be calculated solely on the basis of the city’s previous jurisdictional boundaries, without regard to the change in that city’s jurisdictional boundaries. For each following fiscal year, the percentage change in gross taxable assessed valuation from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year shall be calculated on the basis of the city’s current jurisdictional boundaries.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), “vehicle license fee adjustment amount,” for a city incorporating after January 1, 2004, and on or before January 1, 2012, means the following:

(A) For the 2017–18 fiscal year, the quotient derived from the following fraction:

(i) The numerator is the product of the following two amounts:

(I) The sum of the most recent vehicle license fee adjustment amounts determined for all cities in the county.

(II) The population of the incorporating city.

(ii) The denominator is the sum of the populations of all cities in the county.

(B) For the 2018–19 fiscal year, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the sum of the following two amounts:

(i) The vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the prior fiscal year.

(ii) The product of the following two amounts:

(I) The amount described in clause (i).

(II) The percentage change from the prior fiscal year to the current fiscal year in gross taxable assessed valuation within the jurisdiction of the entity, as reflected in the equalized assessment roll for those fiscal years.

(3) For the 2013–14 fiscal year, the vehicle license fee adjustment amount that is determined under subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) for the County of Orange shall be increased by fifty-three million dollars ($53,000,000). For the 2014–15 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the calculation of the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the County of Orange under subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) shall be based on a prior fiscal year amount that reflects the full amount of this one-time increase of fifty-three million dollars ($53,000,000).

(4) “Countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount” means, for any fiscal year, the total sum of the amounts described in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) for a county or city and county, and each city in the county.

(5) On or before June 30 of each fiscal year, the auditor shall report to the Controller, in an electronic format provided by the Controller, the vehicle license fee adjustment amount for the county and each city in the county for that fiscal year. The Controller shall make the information available to the public in a readily accessible compiled electronic file via the Controller’s internet website on or before September 1 of each year.

(d) For the 2005–06 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, shall not reflect, for a preceding fiscal year, any portion of any allocation required by this section.

(e) For purposes of Section 15 of Article XI of the California Constitution, the allocations from a Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund constitute successor taxes that are otherwise required to be allocated to counties and cities, and as successor taxes, the obligation to make those transfers as required by this section shall not be extinguished nor disregarded in any manner that adversely affects the security of, or the ability of, a county or city to pay the principal and interest on any debts or obligations that were funded or secured by that city’s or county’s allocated share of motor vehicle license fee revenues.

(f) This section shall not be construed to do any of the following:

(1) Reduce any allocations of excess, additional, or remaining funds that would otherwise have been allocated to county superintendents of schools, cities, counties, and cities and counties pursuant to clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Sections 97.2 and 97.3 or Article 4 (commencing with Section 98) had this section not been enacted. The allocations required by this section shall be adjusted to comply with this paragraph.

(2) Require an increased ad valorem property tax revenue allocation or increased tax increment allocation to a community redevelopment agency.

(3) Alter the manner in which ad valorem property tax revenue growth from fiscal year to fiscal year is otherwise determined or allocated in a county.

(4) Reduce ad valorem property tax revenue allocations required under Article 4 (commencing with Section 98).

(g) Tax exchange or revenue sharing agreements, entered into prior to the operative date of this section, between local agencies or between local agencies and nonlocal agencies are deemed to be modified to account for the reduced vehicle license fee revenues resulting from the act that added this section. These agreements are modified in that these reduced revenues are, in kind and in lieu thereof, replaced with ad valorem property tax revenue from a Vehicle License Fee Property Tax Compensation Fund or an Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2019, Ch. 329, Sec. 19. (SB 780) Effective January 1, 2020.)


text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for each of the 2004–05 and 2005–06 fiscal years, all of the following apply:

(a) (1) The total amount of revenue required to be allocated to each county and each city and county under Section 97.70 shall be reduced by the dollar amount indicated as follows:Property Tax Reduction per CountyAlameda $ 14,993,115Alpine 13,578Amador 341,856Butte 1,968,640Calaveras 367,372Colusa 227,244Contra Costa 9,266,091Del Norte 260,620El Dorado 1,465,981Fresno 7,778,611Glenn 302,192Humboldt 1,433,725Imperial 1,499,081Inyo 188,370Kern 6,684,032Kings 1,409,501Lake 531,524Lassen 317,119Los Angeles 103,217,625Madera 1,164,287Marin 2,369,777Mariposa 177,419Mendocino 997,570Merced 2,211,012Modoc 119,325Mono 92,964Monterey 3,789,991Napa 1,128,692Nevada 503,547Orange 27,730,861Placer 2,219,818Plumas 238,066Riverside 14,161,003Sacramento 12,232,737San Benito 477,872San Bernardino 16,361,855San Diego 27,470,228San Francisco 15,567,648San Joaquin 6,075,964San Luis Obispo 2,350,289San Mateo 6,704,877Santa Barbara 3,894,357Santa Clara 17,155,293Santa Cruz 2,433,423Shasta 1,592,267Sierra 37,051Siskiyou 496,974Solano 3,796,251Sonoma 4,439,389Stanislaus 4,516,707Sutter 764,351Tehama 618,393Trinity 104,770Tulare 3,781,964Tuolumne 515,961Ventura 7,085,556Yolo 1,735,079Yuba 620,137(2) The total amount of reductions for all counties and cities and counties determined pursuant to this subdivision is three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) for the 2004–05 fiscal year and that same amount for the 2005–06 fiscal year.

(b) (1) The total amount of revenue required to be allocated to a city and county under Section 97.70 shall be reduced by the product of the following two amounts:

(A) The percentage represented by the following fraction:

(i) The numerator is the total amount of money allocated to the city and county from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund for the 2002–03 fiscal year pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 11005, as reported in the State Controller’s Monthly Motor Vehicle License Fee Reports for the 2002–03 fiscal year.

(ii) The denominator is the total amount of money allocated among all cities and cities and counties from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund for the 2002–03 fiscal year pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 11005, as reported in the State Controller’s Monthly Motor Vehicle License Fee Reports for the 2002–03 fiscal year.

(B) Three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000).

(2) (A) The total amount of revenue required to be allocated to each city under Section 97.70 shall be reduced by the sum of the following three amounts:

(i) The product of the following two amounts:

(I) The percentage represented by the following fraction:

(Ia) The numerator is the total amount of money allocated to the city from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in the State Controller’s Monthly Motor Vehicle License Fee Reports for the 2002–03 fiscal year.

(Ib) The denominator is the total amount of money allocated among all cities from the Motor Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in the State Controller’s Monthly Motor Vehicle License Fee Reports for the 2002–03 fiscal year.

(II) The product of the following two amounts:

(IIa) Thirty-three and one-third percent.

(IIb) The difference between three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) and the amount described in paragraph (1).

(ii) The product of the following two amounts:

(I) The percentage represented by the following fraction:

(Ia) The numerator is the total amount of money transmitted to the city under Section 7204 for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in Table 21A of the 2002–03 edition of the State Board of Equalization Annual Report.

(Ib) The denominator is the total amount of money transmitted to all cities under Section 7204 for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in Table 21A of the 2002–03 edition of the State Board of Equalization Annual Report.

(II) The product of the following two amounts:

(IIa) Thirty-three and one-third percent.

(IIb) The difference between three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) and the amount described in paragraph (1).

(iii) The product of the following two amounts:

(I) The percentage represented by the following fraction:

(Ia) The numerator is the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the city for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Cities Annual Report.

(Ib) The denominator is the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated among all cities for the 2002–03 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Cities Annual Report.

(II) The product of the following two amounts:

(IIa) Thirty-three and one-third percent.

(IIb) The difference between three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) and the amount described in paragraph (1).

(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), the reduction required by this paragraph for any city shall not be less than 2 percent, nor more than 4 percent, of the general revenues of the city, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Cities Annual Report. If the amount determined for a city under subparagraph (A) exceeds 4 percent of the general revenues of the city, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Cities Annual Report, the amount of that excess shall be allocated among the reductions required for all other cities in percentage shares corresponding to those reduction amounts.

(3) On or before September 15, 2004, the Controller shall notify the auditor of each county and city and county of the reductions required by this subdivision.

(4) The total amount of reductions for all cities and cities and counties determined pursuant to this subdivision shall be three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) for the 2004–05 fiscal year and that same amount for the 2005–06 fiscal year.

(5) (A) In lieu of a reduction under paragraph (2), a city may transmit to the county auditor for deposit in the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund an amount equal to that reduction. For the 2004–05 fiscal year, if the county auditor does not receive a payment under this paragraph from a city on or before October 1, 2004, the auditor shall make the reduction required by paragraph (2). For the 2005–06 fiscal year, if the county auditor does not receive a payment under this paragraph from a city on or before October 1, 2005, the auditor shall make the reduction required by paragraph (2).

(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, to make the transmittals authorized by this paragraph, a city may use any funds or revenues, the use of which is not restricted by federal law or the California Constitution.

(6) (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a city that has established a reserve for subsidence contingencies may, for the 2004–05 and 2005–06 fiscal years only, retain interest earned on that reserve for the previous calendar year in an amount not to exceed the amount of the reduction for that city required by this subdivision.

(B) The Legislature finds and declares that the amounts retained by a city pursuant to subparagraph (A) are in excess of trust needs and are free from the public trust for navigation, commerce, fisheries, and any other trust uses and restrictions.

(C) A city that has retained an amount under subparagraph (A) shall, beginning with the 2006–07 fiscal year, repay to the reserve for subsidence contingencies that amount so retained. The repayment shall be made in annual increments, which increments shall not be less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), until the amount retained by the city has been repaid. Those amounts repaid to the reserve for subsidence contingencies are subject to the public trust and shall be used only for the purposes prescribed by law for the reserve.

(c) That amount of revenue that is not allocated to a county, city and county, or a city as a result of subdivisions (a) and (b), and that amount that is received by the county auditor under paragraph (5) of subdivision (b), shall be deposited in the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund and shall be allocated as specified in subdivision (d) of Section 97.3.

(d) For the 2005–06 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, shall not reflect, for a preceding fiscal year, any portion of any allocation required by this section.

history: (History: Amended (as added by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211) by Stats. 2004, Ch. 610, Sec. 7. Effective September 20, 2004.)


text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for each of the 2004–05 and 2005–06 fiscal years, all of the following apply:

(a) (1) (A) (i) Except as otherwise provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue, other than these revenues that are pledged to debt service, otherwise allocated for each of those fiscal years to each enterprise special district shall be reduced by the lesser of the following:

(I) Forty percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001–02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(II) An amount equal to 10 percent of that district’s total revenues for the 2001–02 fiscal year, from whatever source, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(ii) The total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise allocated for each of those fiscal years to each enterprise special district that is a transit district shall be reduced by 3 percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001–02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(iii) The total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise allocated for each of those fiscal years to an enterprise special district that also performs, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, nonenterprise functions other than fire protection or police protection shall be decreased by both of the following, not to exceed 10 percent of a district’s total revenues from whatever source, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report:

(I) Forty percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district’s enterprise functions for the 2001–02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(II) Ten percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district’s nonenterprise functions for the 2001–02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(B) If an enterprise special district is located in more than one county, the auditor of each county in which that enterprise special district is located shall implement that portion of the total reduction, required by subparagraph (A) with respect to that district, determined by the ratio of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that district from the county to the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that district from all counties.

(2) The Controller shall determine the amount of the ad valorem property tax revenue reduction required by paragraph (1) for each enterprise special district in each county. The Controller shall then determine whether the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue reductions under paragraph (1) and Section 97.73 is less than three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000). If, for either the 2004–05 or 2005–06 fiscal year, the total of the amount of these reductions is less than three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000), the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to each enterprise special district, other than an enterprise special district that is a transit district, shall be reduced by an additional amount equal to that district’s proportionate share of the difference, provided that the total reduction under this section for a district shall not exceed 10 percent of that district’s revenue from whatever source for the 2001–02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report. If, as a result of this 10-percent limitation, any portion of the difference remains unapplied, that remaining portion shall, as many times as necessary, be applied in proportionate shares among those enterprise special districts, other than transit districts, for which the 10-percent limitation has not been reached, until a three hundred fifty million dollar reduction ($350,000,000) has been applied. The Controller shall, on or before October 25, 2004, notify the Director of Finance of the reduction amounts determined under this subdivision. The Director of Finance shall, on or before November 12, 2004, notify each county auditor of the allocation reductions required by this paragraph and Section 97.73.

(b) That amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is not allocated to an enterprise special district as a result of subdivision (a) shall instead be deposited in the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund and shall be allocated as specified in subdivision (d) of Section 97.3.

(c) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:

(1) “Enterprise special district” means a special district that performs, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, an enterprise function. “Enterprise special district” does not include a fire protection district that was formed under the Shade Tree Law of 1909 set forth in Article 2 (commencing with Section 25620) of Chapter 7 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, a local health care district as described in Division 23 (commencing with Section 32000) of the Health and Safety Code, or a qualified special district as defined in Section 97.34.

(2) With respect to an enterprise special district that also performs, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, a police protection nonenterprise function with certified peace officers, as described in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or a fire protection nonenterprise function, “the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001–02 fiscal year” does not include ad valorem property tax revenue of that district for fire protection or police protection nonenterprise functions, as reported in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(3) For purposes of this section, “revenues that are pledged to debt service” includes only those amounts required as the sole source of repayment to pay debt service costs in the 2002–03 fiscal year on debt instruments issued by an enterprise special district for the acquisition of fixed assets. For purposes of this paragraph, “fixed assets” means land, buildings, equipment, and improvements, including improvements to buildings.

(d) For the purposes of this section, if a special district’s financial transactions do not appear in the 2001–02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, the Controller shall use the most recent data available for that district.

(e) For the 2005–06 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, shall not reflect, for a preceding fiscal year, any portion of any allocation required by this section.

history: (History: Amended (as added by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211) by Stats. 2004, Ch. 610, Sec. 8. Effective September 20, 2004.)


text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for each of the 2004-05 and 2005-06 fiscal years, all of the following apply:

(a) (1) (A) The total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue, other than those revenues that are pledged to debt service, otherwise allocated for each of those fiscal years to each nonenterprise special district shall be reduced by 10 percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001-02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(B) (i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), for the Laguna Niguel Community Service District in the County of Orange, the reduction described in subparagraph (A) shall be 4 percent rather than 10 percent.

(ii) If the district described in clause (i) is not dissolved before July 1, 2006, for each of the 2006-07 and 2007-08 fiscal years, the auditor shall reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue, other than those revenues that are pledged to debt service, otherwise allocated to that district for each of those fiscal years by 6 percent of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001-02 fiscal year, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(C) If a nonenterprise special district is located in more than one county, the auditor of each county in which that nonenterprise special district is located shall implement that portion of the total reduction, required by subparagraph (A) with respect to that district, determined by the ratio of the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that district from the county to the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that district from all counties.

(2) The Controller shall determine the amount of the ad valorem property tax revenue reduction required by paragraph (1) for each nonenterprise special district in each county and notify the Director of Finance of these amounts on or before October 25, 2004.

(b) That amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is not allocated to a nonenterprise special district as a result of subdivision (a) shall instead be deposited in the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund and shall be allocated as specified in subdivision (d) of Section 97.3.

(c) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:

(1) (A) “Nonenterprise special district” means a special district that engages solely, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, in nonenterprise functions, and a qualified special district as defined in Section 97.34.

(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, “nonenterprise special district” does not include any of the following:

(i) A fire protection district that was formed under the Shade Tree Law of 1909 set forth in Article 2 (commencing with Section 25620) of Chapter 7 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code.

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

(iii) A fire protection district formed under the Fire Protection District Law of 1987 (Part 2.7 (commencing with Section 13800) of Division 12 of the Health and Safety Code) or a fire protection district formed under the Fire Protection District Law of 1961, or any of its statutory predecessors, and that existed on January 1, 1988.

(iv) Any library special district, including, but not limited to, the following:

(I) 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.

(II) A unified school district and union school district public library district established pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 18300) of Part 11 of Division 1 of Title 1 of the Education Code.

(III) A library district established pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 19400) of Part 11 of Division 1 of Title 1 of the Education Code.

(IV) A library district in unincorporated towns and villages established pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 19600) of Part 11 of Division 1 of Title 1 of the Education Code.

(v) 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 Veterans Code.

(vi) A mosquito abatement district or a vector control district formed pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 2000) of Division 3 of the Health and Safety Code, or any predecessor to that law.

(vii) The Glenn County Pest Abatement District and the East Side Mosquito Abatement District formed pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 2800) of Division 3 of the Health and Safety Code.

(viii) (I) For the 2005-06 fiscal year, a local health care district as described in Division 23 (commencing with Section 32000) of the Health and Safety Code.

(II) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in making the determinations required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 97.72, the Controller shall ensure that the operation of this clause does not result in a net increase in the total amount of the reduction for any special district required by this section or Section 97.72 for the 2005-06 fiscal year from the total amount of the reduction determined under those provisions for that special district for the 2004-05 fiscal year.

(2) With respect to a nonenterprise special district that performs, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, nonenterprise functions and police protection services with certified peace officers, as described in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or nonenterprise functions and fire protection services, “the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001-02 fiscal year” does not include ad valorem property tax revenue of that district for fire protection or police protection nonenterprise functions, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(3) With respect to a nonenterprise special district formed pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 5500) of Chapter 3 of Division 5 of the Public Resources Code that performs, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, nonenterprise functions and police protection services with certified peace officers, as described in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or nonenterprise functions and fire protection services, “the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue of the district for the 2001-02 fiscal year” does not include total expenditures net of total revenues by that district for fire protection or police protection nonenterprise functions, as reported in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report.

(4) For purposes of this section, “revenues that are pledged to debt service” includes only those amounts required as the sole source of repayment to pay debt service costs in the 2002-03 fiscal year on debt instruments issued by a nonenterprise special district for the acquisition of fixed assets. For purposes of this paragraph, “fixed assets” means land, buildings, equipment, and improvements, including improvements to buildings.

(d) For the purposes of this section, if a special district’s financial transactions do not appear in the 2001-02 edition of the State Controller’s Special Districts Annual Report, the Controller shall use the most recent data available for that district.

(e) For the 2005-06 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, shall not reflect, for a preceding fiscal year, any portion of any allocation required by this section.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2005, Ch. 602, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2006.)


text: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the 2004–05 and 2005–06 fiscal years, a county shall not impose a fee, charge, or other levy on a city, nor reduce a city’s allocation of ad valorem property tax revenue, in reimbursement for the services performed by the county under Sections 97.68 and 97.70. For the 2006–07 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, a county may impose a fee, charge, or other levy on a city for these services, but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of providing these services.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211, Sec. 26. Effective August 5, 2004.)


text:
(a) On or before September 1, 2004, the Controller shall determine the countywide vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined in Section 97.70, for the 2004–05 fiscal year and the vehicle license fee adjustment amount, as defined in Section 97.70, for each city, county, and city and county for the 2004–05 fiscal year, and notify the county auditor of these amounts.

(b) On or before October 15, 2005, in consultation with the Bureau of State Audits, the Controller shall determine the amount specified in clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 97.70 for each city, county, and city and county and notify the county auditor of these amounts.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2005, Ch. 74, Sec. 67. Effective July 19, 2005.)


text: An enterprise special district and a nonenterprise special district shall not pledge, on or after July 1, 2004, and before June 30, 2006, through a bond covenant to pay debt service costs on debt instruments issued by the district, any ad valorem property tax revenue that would otherwise be dedicated to the reduction required by Sections 97.72 and 97.73.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2004, Ch. 211, Sec. 28. Effective August 5, 2004.)


text:
(a) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, for the 2007–08 fiscal year, the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue deemed allocated by the Fresno County Auditor to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District shall be decreased, for the prior fiscal year, by six hundred thirty-three thousand dollars ($633,000).

(2) Any reduction in the amount of ad valorem property tax revenues deposited in the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund resulting from the implementation of paragraph (1) shall be applied exclusively to reduce the amounts that are allocated from that fund to school districts and county offices of education, and shall not be applied to reduce the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenues that are allocated from that fund to community college districts.

(b) For the 2008–09 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts determined under subdivision (a) of Section 96.1, or any successor to that provision, shall reflect, for a preceding fiscal year, the allocation adjustments required by this section.

(c) In making the determinations required by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 97.2 for the 2007–08 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Director of Finance shall ensure that the operation of this section does not result in a net increase in the total amount of the reduction required by Section 97.2 for any special district.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2007, Ch. 490, Sec. 1. Effective October 11, 2007.)


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the 2011–12 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor of a qualified county shall do both of the following:

(1) Increase the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to that county by the county equity amount.

(2) (A) Decrease the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund by the county equity amount.

(B) If, for any fiscal year, there is not enough ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to a county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the auditor to complete the allocation reduction required by subparagraph (A), the auditor shall additionally reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to all school districts in the county for that fiscal year by an amount equal to the difference between the county equity amount and the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for that fiscal year. This reduction for each school district in the county shall be the percentage share of the total reduction that is equal to the proportion that the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to the school district bears to the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue that is otherwise required to be allocated to all school districts in a county. For purposes of this subparagraph, “school districts” do not include any districts that are excess tax school entities, as defined in Section 95.

(C) Any reduction in the amount of ad valorem property tax revenues deposited in the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund as a result of subparagraph (A) shall be applied exclusively to reduce the amounts that are allocated from that fund to school districts and county offices of education, and shall not be applied to reduce the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenues that are otherwise required to be allocated from that fund to community college districts.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Qualified county” means the county that, of all the counties in the state, was allocated the second lowest percentage of the sum of both of the following for the 2006–07 fiscal year:

(A) The countywide ad valorem property tax revenue.

(B) The less than countywide ad valorem property tax revenue.

(2) “County equity amount” means one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) in the 2011–12 fiscal year, and two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) in the 2012–13 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter.

(c) For the 2011–12 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, ad valorem property tax revenue allocations made pursuant to Sections 96.1 and 96.5 shall not incorporate the allocation adjustments made by this section.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2010, Ch. 5, Sec. 2. (SB 85) Effective January 1, 2011.)


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for the 1995–96 fiscal year only, the auditor of any qualified county shall, upon being directed by the board of supervisors, increase the amount of property tax revenue allocated to that county by an amount of property tax revenue, not to exceed one million five hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,550,000), that is attributable to the difference between the following amounts:

(1) The amount of the reduction that would have been determined by the Director of Finance for the qualified county pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 97.31 in the absence of the two million dollar ($2,000,000) limitation of subdivision (a) and paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of that section, and the maximum limitation of paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) of that same section.

(2) The amount of the reduction that was determined by the Director of Finance for the qualified county pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 97.31.

If the board of supervisors directs the auditor, pursuant to this subdivision, to increase the amount of the property tax revenue allocation of the county, the board shall also direct the auditor to commensurately reduce the amount of the property tax revenue allocation to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund. The county shall expend any additional amount of property tax revenue that it receives pursuant to this subdivision solely for the purpose of funding public safety services.

(b) The Director of Finance shall determine for each qualified county the difference described in subdivision (a), and shall as soon as reasonably possible after the effective date of the act adding this section, notify the board of supervisors of each qualified county in writing of the amount of the difference calculated for that county.

(c) For purposes of this section, “qualified county” means an “eligible county,” as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 97.31, that was subject to the reduction required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of that same section.

(d) Except as otherwise required by law, the county auditor of a qualified county shall allocate property tax revenues for the 1996–97 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter in those amounts that fully reflect, as otherwise required by this chapter, any increases or reductions in allocations that are directed by the board of supervisors pursuant to subdivision (a).

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2004, Ch. 183, Sec. 319. Effective January 1, 2005.)


text: Any reduction amount determined for a county pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 97.36 that is not applied to the benefit of that county in that county’s designated fiscal year, as defined in Section 97.36, may not be so applied in a later fiscal year, regardless of any increase in the amount of revenues allocated in that county to qualifying school entities as a result of the county’s adoption of the alternate procedure for the distribution of property tax levies authorized by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1998, Ch. 528, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 1999.)


text: Commencing February 1, 2012, the county auditor shall make the calculations required by Section 97.4 based on the amount deposited on behalf of each former redevelopment agency into the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 34182 of the Health and Safety Code. The calculations required by Section 97.4 shall result in cities, counties, and special districts annually remitting to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund the same amounts they would have remitted but for the operation of Part 1.8 (commencing with Section 34161) and Part 1.85 (commencing with Section 34170) of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2011, 1st Ex. Sess., Ch. 5, Sec. 8. (AB 26 1x) Effective June 29, 2011. Text reformed per California Redevelopment Assn. v. Matosantos (2011) 53 Cal.4th 231.)


citation: RTC § 98

text:
(a) In each county, other than the County of Ventura, having within its boundaries a qualifying city, the computations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, for the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, shall be modified as follows:

With respect to tax rate areas within the boundaries of a qualifying city, there shall be excluded from the aggregate amount of “property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this chapter to local agencies, other than for a qualifying city, in the prior fiscal year,” an amount equal to the sum of the amounts calculated pursuant to the TEA formula.

(b) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, each qualifying city shall, for the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, be allocated by the auditor an amount determined pursuant to the TEA formula.

(2) For each qualifying city, the auditor shall, for the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, allocate the amount determined pursuant to the TEA formula to all tax rate areas within that city in proportion to each tax rate area’s share of the total assessed value in the city for the applicable fiscal year, and the amount so determined shall be subtracted from the county’s proportionate share of property tax revenue for that fiscal year within those tax rate areas.

(3) After making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2), but before making the calculations pursuant to Section 96.5 or its predecessor section, the auditor shall, for all tax rate areas in the qualifying city, calculate the proportionate share of property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this section and Section 96.1, or their predecessor sections, in the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter to each jurisdiction in the tax rate area.

(4) In lieu of making the allocations of annual tax increment pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 96.5 or its predecessor section, the auditor shall, for the 1989–90 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, allocate the amount of property tax revenue determined pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 96.5 or its predecessor section to jurisdictions in the tax rate area using the proportionate shares derived pursuant to paragraph (3).

(5) For purposes of the calculations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, in the 1990–91 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts that would have been allocated to qualifying cities pursuant to this subdivision shall be deemed to be the “amount of property tax revenue allocated in the prior fiscal year.”

(c) “TEA formula” means the Tax Equity Allocation formula, and shall be calculated by the auditor for each qualifying city as follows:

(1) For the 1988–89 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the auditor shall determine the total amount of property tax revenue to be allocated to all jurisdictions in all tax rate areas within the qualifying city, before the allocation and payment of funds in that fiscal year to a community redevelopment agency within the qualifying city, as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code.

(2) The auditor shall determine the total amount of funds allocated in each fiscal year to a community redevelopment agency in accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 33670 of the Health and Safety Code.

(3) The auditor shall determine the total amount of funds paid in each fiscal year by a community redevelopment agency within the city to jurisdictions other than the city pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 33401 and Section 33676 of the Health and Safety Code, and the cost to the redevelopment agency of any land or facilities transferred and any amounts paid to jurisdictions other than the city to assist in the construction or reconstruction of facilities pursuant to an agreement entered into under Section 33401 or 33445.5 of the Health and Safety Code.

(4) The auditor shall subtract the amount determined in paragraph (3) from the amount determined in paragraph (2).

(5) The auditor shall subtract the amount determined in paragraph (4) from the amount determined in paragraph (1).

(6) The amount computed in paragraph (5) shall be multiplied by the following percentages in order to determine the TEA formula amount to be distributed to the qualifying city in each fiscal year:

(A) For the first fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 1 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(B) For the second fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 2 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(C) For the third fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 3 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(D) For the fourth fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 4 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(E) For the fifth fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 5 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(F) For the sixth fiscal year in which the qualifying city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 6 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(G) For the seventh fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter in which the city receives a distribution pursuant to this section, 7 percent of the amount determined in paragraph (5).

(d) “Qualifying city” means any city, except a qualifying city as defined in Section 98.1, that incorporated prior to June 5, 1987, and had an amount of property tax revenue allocated to it pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 96.1 or its predecessor section in the 1988–89 fiscal year that is less than 7 percent of the amount of property tax revenue computed as follows:

(1) The auditor shall determine the total amount of property tax revenue allocated to the city in the 1988–89 fiscal year.

(2) The auditor shall subtract the amount in the 1988–89 fiscal year determined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) from the amount determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (c).

(3) The auditor shall subtract the amount determined in paragraph (2) from the amount of property tax revenue determined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c).

(4) The auditor shall divide the amount of property tax revenue determined in paragraph (1) of this subdivision by the amount of property tax revenue determined in paragraph (3) of this subdivision.

(5) If the quotient determined in paragraph (4) of this subdivision is less than 0.07, the city is a qualifying city. If the quotient determined in that paragraph is equal to or greater than 0.07, the city is not a qualifying city.

(e) The auditor may assess each qualifying city its proportional share of the actual costs of making the calculations required by this section, and may deduct that assessment from the amount allocated pursuant to subdivision (b). For purposes of this subdivision, a qualifying city’s proportional share of the auditor’s actual costs shall not exceed the proportion it receives of the total amounts excluded in the county pursuant to subdivision (a).

(f) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), in any fiscal year in which a qualifying city is to receive a distribution pursuant to this section, the auditor shall reduce the actual amount distributed to the qualifying city by the sum of the following:

(1) The amount of property tax revenue that was exchanged between the county and the qualifying city as a result of negotiation pursuant to Section 99.03.

(2) (A) The amount of revenue not collected by the qualifying city in the first fiscal year following the city’s reduction after January 1, 1988, of the tax rate or tax base of any locally imposed tax, except any tax that was imposed after January 1, 1988. In the case of a tax that existed before January 1, 1988, this clause shall apply only with respect to an amount attributable to a reduction of the rate or base to a level lower than the rate or base applicable on January 1, 1988. The amount so computed by the auditor shall constitute a reduction in the amount of property tax revenue distributed to the qualifying city pursuant to this section in each succeeding fiscal year. That amount shall be aggregated with any additional amount computed pursuant to this clause as the result of the city’s reduction in any subsequent year of the tax rate or tax base of the same or any other locally imposed general or special tax.

(B) No reduction may be made pursuant to subparagraph (A) in the case in which a local tax is reduced or eliminated as a result of either a court decision or the approval or rejection of a ballot measure by the voters.

(3) The amount of property tax revenue received pursuant to this chapter in excess of the amount allocated for the 1986–87 fiscal year by all special districts that are governed by the city council of the qualifying city or whose governing body is the same as the city council of the qualifying city with respect to all tax rate areas within the boundaries of the qualifying city.

Notwithstanding this paragraph:

(A) Commencing with the 1994–95 fiscal year, the auditor shall not reduce the amount distributed to a qualifying city under this section by reason of that city becoming the successor agency to a special district, that is dissolved, merged with that city, or becomes a subsidiary district of that city, on or after July 1, 1994.

(B) Commencing with the 1997–98 fiscal year, the auditor shall not reduce the amount distributed to a qualifying city under this section by reason of that city withdrawing from a county free library system pursuant to Section 19116 of the Education Code.

(4) Any amount of property tax revenues that has been exchanged pursuant to Section 56842 of the Government Code, as that section read on January 1, 1998, between the City of Rancho Mirage and a community services district, the formation of which was initiated on or after March 6, 1997, pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 56800) of Part 3 of Division 3 of Title 5 of the Government Code.

(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, in no event may the auditor reduce the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise allocated to a qualifying city pursuant to this section on the basis of any additional ad valorem property tax revenues received by that city pursuant to a services for revenue agreement. For purposes of this subdivision, a “services for revenue agreement” means any agreement between a qualifying city and the county in which it is located, entered into by joint resolution of that city and that county, under which additional service responsibilities are exchanged in consideration for additional property tax revenues.

(h) In any fiscal year in which a qualifying city is to receive a distribution pursuant to this section, the auditor shall increase the actual amount distributed to the qualifying city by the amount of property tax revenue allocated to the qualifying city pursuant to Section 19116 of the Education Code.

(i) If the auditor determines that the amount to be distributed to a qualifying city pursuant to subdivision (b), as modified by subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) would result in a qualifying city having proceeds of taxes in excess of its appropriation limit, the auditor shall reduce the amount, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by the amount that exceeds the city’s appropriations limit.

(j) The amount not distributed to the tax rate areas of a qualifying city as a result of this section shall be distributed by the auditor to the county.

(k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no qualifying city shall be distributed an amount pursuant to this section that is less than the amount the city would have been allocated without the application of the TEA formula.

(l) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the auditor shall not distribute any amount determined pursuant to this section to any qualifying city that has in the prior fiscal year used any revenues or issued bonds for the construction, acquisition, or development, of any facility which is defined in Section 103(b)(4), 103(b)(5), or 103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 prior to the enactment of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-514) and is no longer eligible for tax-exempt financing.

(m) (1) The amendments made to this section, and the repeal of Section 98.04, by the act that added this subdivision shall apply for the 2006–07 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter.

(2) For the 2006–07 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, all of the following apply:

(A) The auditor of the County of Santa Clara shall do both of the following:

(i) Reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be allocated to qualifying cities in that county by the ERAF reimbursement amount. This reduction for each qualifying city in the county for each fiscal year shall be the percentage share, of the total reduction required by this clause for all qualifying cities in the county for the 2006–07 fiscal year, that is equal to the proportion that the total amount of additional ad valorem property tax revenue that is required to be allocated to the qualifying city as a result of the act that added this subdivision bears to the total amount of additional ad valorem property tax revenue that is required to be allocated to all qualifying cities in the county as a result of the act that added this subdivision.

(ii) Increase the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be allocated to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund by the ERAF reimbursement amount.

(B) For purposes of this subdivision, “ERAF reimbursement amount” means an amount equal to the difference between the following two amounts:

(i) The portion of the annual tax increment that would have been allocated from the county to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the applicable fiscal year if the act that added this subdivision had not been enacted.

(ii) The portion of the annual tax increment that is allocated from the county to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the applicable fiscal year.

(n) Notwithstanding subdivision (m) and except as provided in paragraph (2), for the 2015–16 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, all of the following shall apply:

(1) The auditor of the County of Santa Clara shall do both of the following:

(A) (i) Reduce the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be allocated to qualifying cities in that county by the percentage specified in clause (ii) of the ERAF reimbursement amount. This reduction for each qualifying city in the county for each fiscal year shall be the percentage share, of the total reduction required by this clause for all qualifying cities in the county for the 2015–16 fiscal year, that is equal to the proportion that the total amount of additional ad valorem property tax revenue that is required to be allocated to the qualifying city as a result of the act that added this subdivision bears to the total amount of additional ad valorem property tax revenue that is required to be allocated to all qualifying cities in the county as a result of the act that added this subdivision.

(ii) (I) For the first fiscal year in which qualifying cities receive an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, 80 percent.

(II) For the second fiscal year in which qualifying cities receive an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, 60 percent.

(III) For the third fiscal year in which qualifying cities receive an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, 40 percent.

(IV) For the fourth fiscal year in which qualifying cities receive an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, 20 percent.

(V) For the fifth fiscal year in which qualifying cities receive an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, and for each fiscal year thereafter in which a qualifying city receives an allocation pursuant to this subdivision, zero percent.

(B) Increase the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be allocated to the county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund by the percentage specified in clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) of the ERAF reimbursement amount.

(2) The auditor of the County of Santa Clara shall not adjust the ERAF reimbursement amount by the percentages specified in clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) in any fiscal year in which the amount of moneys required to be applied by the state for the support of school districts and community college districts is determined pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution.

(3) For purposes of this subdivision, “ERAF reimbursement amount” has the same meaning as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (m).

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2015, Ch. 325, Sec. 26. (SB 107) Effective September 22, 2015.)

path: 1. PROPERTY TAXATION > 0.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE XIII A OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION > 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue > 4. Tax Equity Allocations for Certain Cities


text:
(a) An independent qualifying city shall receive a distribution of the following percentages of the TEA formula, as computed in subdivision (c) of Section 98, if the amount of that distribution, less the applicable reductions provided for in subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Section 98, would be greater than the amount the city would have been allocated without the application of the TEA formula:

(1) Thirty-three and one-third percent of the amount determined in subparagraph (G) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (c) of Section 98, less any applicable reductions provided for in subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Section 98, for the first fiscal year in which the independent qualifying city receives an allocation pursuant to this section.

(2) Sixty-six and two-thirds percent of the amount determined in subparagraph (G) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (c) of Section 98, less any applicable reductions provided for in subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Section 98, for the second fiscal year in which the independent qualifying city receives an allocation pursuant to this section.

(3) One hundred percent of the amount determined in subparagraph (G) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (c) of Section 98, less any applicable reductions provided for in subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Section 98, for the third fiscal year in which the independent qualifying city receives an allocation pursuant to this section.

The amount not distributed as a result of this subdivision to the tax rate areas in each independent qualifying city, shall be allocated by the auditor to the county. The auditor may assess each independent qualifying city its proportional share of the actual costs of making the calculations required by this subdivision, and may deduct that assessment from the amount allocated pursuant to this subdivision. For purposes of this subdivision, an independent qualifying city’s proportional share of the auditor’s actual costs shall not exceed the proportion it receives of the total amounts excluded in the county pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 98.

(b) “Independent qualifying city” means a qualifying city, as defined in Section 98, in the County of Los Angeles which met the following criteria on January 1, 1988:

(1) Was not served by a special district which received a portion of the 1 percent property tax revenue, and provided any of the following services to the qualified city:

(A) Emergency medical services.

(B) Fire prevention services.

(C) Fire suppression.

(D) Libraries.

(E) Parks.

(F) Recreation services.

(G) Street lighting.

(2) Did not have redevelopment project areas which receive property tax revenues.

(3) The county general fund received greater than 65 percent of the 1 percent property tax revenues collected from tax rate areas within the qualifying city’s boundaries.

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

article: 4. Tax Equity Allocations for Certain Cities


citation: RTC § 98.1

text:
(a) In the County of Orange, the computations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, for the 1984–85 fiscal year only, shall be modified as follows:

(1) With respect to tax rate areas within the boundaries of a qualifying city, there shall be excluded from the aggregate amount of “property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this chapter to local agencies, other than for a qualifying city, in the prior fiscal year,” an amount equal to the sum of amounts calculated pursuant to the TEA formula, as defined in subdivision (c).

(2) The amount excluded pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be subtracted from the allocations of all local agencies other than a qualifying city with tax rate areas within the boundaries of a qualifying city in proportion to each such local agency’s share of the total 1983–84 property tax revenues, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 95, allocated to all those tax rate areas.

(b) (1) Each qualifying city, as defined in subdivision (d), shall for the 1984–85 fiscal year only, be allocated by the auditor an amount determined pursuant to the TEA formula, as defined in subdivision (c).

(2) For each qualifying city, the auditor shall distribute the amount determined pursuant to the TEA formula to all tax rate areas within the city in proportion to each tax rate area’s share of the total 1983–84 assessed value in the city.

(3) After making the allocations, pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) but before making the calculations pursuant to Section 96.5, the auditor shall, for all tax rate areas in the qualifying city, calculate the proportionate share of property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this section and Section 96.1 in the 1984–85 fiscal year to each jurisdiction in the tax rate area.

(4) In lieu of making the allocations of annual tax increment pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 96.5 or its predecessor section, the auditor shall for the 1984–85 fiscal year only, allocate the amount of property tax revenue determined pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 96.5 or its predecessor section to jurisdictions in the tax rate area using the proportionate shares derived pursuant to paragraph (3).

(5) For purposes of the calculations made pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, in the 1985–86 fiscal year and fiscal years thereafter, the amounts allocated to qualifying cities pursuant to this subdivision (notwithstanding any deduction made pursuant to subdivision (e)) shall be deemed to be the “amount of property tax revenue allocated pursuant to this chapter in the prior fiscal year.”

(c) “TEA formula” shall mean Tax Equity Allocation formula, and shall be calculated by the auditor by applying a tax rate of ten cents ($.10) per $100 assessed value to the 1983–84 assessed value of the qualifying city.

(d) “Qualifying city” shall mean any city in the County of Orange that existed but did not levy a property tax in the 1977–78 fiscal year.

(e) The auditor may assess each qualifying city its proportional share of the actual costs of making the calculations required by this section, and may deduct that assessment from the amount allocated pursuant to subdivision (b). For purposes of this subdivision, a qualifying city’s proportional share of the auditor’s actual costs shall not exceed the proportion it receives of the total amounts excluded in the county pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a).