§ 97.3. — 97.3. (Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 24, Sec. 85.)

California § 97.3.

• Jurisdiction: California
• Code RTC: Revenue and Taxation Code - RTC
• Div. 1.: DIVISION 1. PROPERTY TAXATION
• Part 0.5.: PART 0.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE XIII A OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
• Ch. 6.: CHAPTER 6. Allocation of Property Tax Revenue
• Art. 3.: ARTICLE 3. Revenue Allocation Shifts for Education

Text

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the computations and allocations made by each county pursuant to Section 96.1 or its predecessor section, as modified by Section 97.2 or its predecessor section for the 1992–93 fiscal year, shall be modified for the 1993–94 fiscal year pursuant to subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive, as follows:
(a)
The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each county and city and county shall be reduced by an amount to be determined by the Director of Finance in accordance with the following:
(1)
The total amount of the
property tax reductions for counties and cities and counties determined pursuant to this section shall be one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollars ($1,998,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.
(2)
The Director of Finance shall determine the amount of the reduction for each county or city and county as follows:
(A)
The proportionate share of the property tax revenue reduction for each county or city and county that would have been imposed on all counties under the proposal specified in the “May Revision of the 1993–94 Governor’s Budget” shall be determined by reference to the document entitled “Estimated County Property Tax Transfers Under Governor’s May Revision Proposal,” published by the Legislative Analyst’s Office on June 1, 1993.
(B)
Each county’s or city and county’s proportionate share of total taxable sales in all counties in the 1991–92 fiscal year shall be determined.
(C)
An amount for each county and city and county shall be determined by applying its proportionate share determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) to the one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollar ($1,998,000,000) statewide reduction for counties and cities and counties.
(D)
An amount for each county and city and county shall be determined by applying its proportionate share determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) to the one billion nine hundred ninety-eight million dollar ($1,998,000,000) statewide reduction for counties and cities and counties.
(E)
The Director of Finance shall add the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraphs (C) and (D) for each county and city and county, and divide the resulting figure by two. The amount so determined for each county and city and county shall be divided by a factor of 1.038. The resulting figure shall be the amount of property tax revenue to be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year.
(3)
The Director of Finance shall, by July 15, 1993, report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee its determination of the amounts determined pursuant to paragraph (2).
(4)
On or before August 15, 1993, the Director of Finance shall notify the auditor of each county and city and county of the amount of property tax revenue reduction
determined for each county and city and county.
(5)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, the amount of the reduction specified in paragraph (2) for any county or city and county that has first implemented, for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the alternative procedure for the distribution of property tax levies authorized by Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8 shall be reduced, for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, in the amount of any increased revenue allocated to each qualifying school entity that would not have been allocated for the 1993–94 fiscal year but for the implementation of that alternative procedure. For purposes of this paragraph, “qualifying school entity” means any school district, county office of education, or community college district that is not an excess tax school entity, as defined in
Section 95, and a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, as described in subdivision (d) of this section and subdivision (d) of Section 97.2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, the amount of any reduction calculated pursuant to this paragraph for any county or city and county shall not exceed the reduction calculated for that county or city and county pursuant to paragraph (2).
(6)
Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (5), the amount of the reduction specified in paragraph (2) for a county of the 16th class that has first implemented, for the 1993–94 fiscal year, the alternative procedure for the distribution of property tax levies authorized by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 4701) of Part 8 shall be reduced, for the 1993–94 fiscal year only, in the amount of any increased revenue distributed to each
qualifying school entity that would not have been distributed for the 1993–94 fiscal year, pursuant to the historical accounting method of that county of the 16th class, but for the implementation of that alternative procedure. For purposes of this paragraph, “qualifying school entity” means any school district, county office of education, or community college district that is not an excess tax school entity, as defined in Section 95, and a county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, as described in subdivision (a) of this section and subdivision (d) of Section 97.2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, the amount of any reduction calculated pursuant to this paragraph for any county shall not exceed the reduction calculated for that county pursuant to paragraph (2).
(b)
The amount of property tax revenue
deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each city shall be reduced by an amount to be determined by the Director of Finance in accordance with the following:
(1)
The total amount of the property tax reductions determined for cities pursuant to this section shall be two hundred eighty-eight million dollars ($288,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.
(2)
The Director of Finance shall determine the amount of reduction for each city as follows:
(A)
The amount of property tax revenue that is estimated to be attributable in the 1993–94 fiscal year to the amount of each city’s state assistance payment received by that city pursuant to Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979 shall be determined.
(B)
A factor for each city equal to the amount determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) for that city, divided by the total of the amounts determined pursuant to subparagraph (A) for all cities, shall be determined.
(C)
An amount for each city equal to the factor determined pursuant to subparagraph (B), multiplied by three hundred eighty-two million five hundred thousand dollars ($382,500,000), shall be determined.
(D)
In no event shall the amount for any city determined pursuant to subparagraph (C) exceed a per capita amount of nineteen dollars and thirty-one cents ($19.31), as determined in accordance with that city’s population on January 1, 1993, as estimated by the Department of Finance.
(E)
The
amount determined for each city pursuant to subparagraphs (C) and (D) shall be the amount of property tax revenue to be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior year.
(3)
The Director of Finance shall, by July 15, 1993, report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee those amounts determined pursuant to paragraph (2).
(4)
On or before August 15, 1993, the Director of Finance shall notify each county auditor of the amount of property tax revenue reduction determined for each city located within that county.
(c)
(1)
The amount of property tax revenue deemed allocated in the prior fiscal year to each special district, as defined pursuant to subdivision (m) of
Section 95, shall be reduced by the amount determined for the district pursuant to paragraph (3) and increased by the amount determined for the district pursuant to paragraph (4). The total net amount of these changes is intended to equal two hundred forty-four million dollars ($244,000,000) in the 1993–94 fiscal year.
(2)
(A)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, no reduction shall be made pursuant to this subdivision with respect to any of the following special districts:
(i)
A local hospital district, as described in Division 23 (commencing with Section 32000) of the Health and Safety Code.
(ii)
A water agency that does not sell water at retail, but not including an agency the
primary function of which, as determined on the basis of total revenues, is flood control.
(iii)
A transit district.
(iv)
A police protection district formed pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 20000) of Division 14 of the Health and Safety Code.
(v)
A special district that was a multicounty special district as of July 1, 1979.
(B)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subdivision, the first one hundred four thousand dollars ($104,000) of the
amount of any reduction that otherwise would be made under this subdivision with respect to a qualifying community services district shall be excluded. For purposes of this subparagraph, a “qualifying community services district” means a community services district that meets all of the following requirements:
(i)
Was formed pursuant to Division 3 (commencing with Section 61000) of Title 6 of the Government Code.
(ii)
Succeeded to the duties and properties of a police protection district upon the dissolution of that district.
(iii)
Currently provides police protection services to substantially the same territory as did that district.
(iv)
Is located
within a county in which the board of supervisors has requested the Department of Finance that this subparagraph be operative in the county.
(3)
(A)
On or before September 15, 1993, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district equal to the amount of its allocation determined pursuant to Section 96 or 96.1, and Section 96.5 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year multiplied by the ratio determined pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of former Section 98.6, as that section read on June 15, 1993. In those counties that were subject to former Sections 98.66, 98.67, and 98.68, as those sections read on that same date, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocation determined pursuant to Section
96 or 96.1, and Section 96.5 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year that is attributed to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. In that county subject to Section 100.4, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocations determined pursuant to Section 96, 96.1, 96.5, or 100.4 or their predecessor sections for the 1993–94 fiscal year that is attributable to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. In determining these amounts, the county auditor shall adjust for the influence of increased assessed valuation within each district, including the effect of jurisdictional changes, and the reductions in property tax allocations required in the 1992–93 fiscal year by Chapters 699 and 1369 of the Statutes of 1992. In the case of a
special district that has been consolidated or reorganized, the auditor shall determine the amount of its current
property tax allocation that is attributable to the prior district’s or districts’ receipt of state assistance payments pursuant to Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, for a special district that is governed by a city council or whose governing board has the same membership as a city council and that is a subsidiary district, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 16271 of the Government Code, the county auditor shall multiply the amount that otherwise would be calculated pursuant to this paragraph by 0.38 and the result shall be used in the calculations required by paragraph (5). In no event shall the amount determined by this paragraph be less than zero.
(B)
Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), commencing with the 1994–95 fiscal year, in the County of Sacramento, the auditor
shall determine the amount for each special district that represents the current amount of its allocations determined pursuant to Section 96, 96.1, 96.5, or 100.6 for the 1994–95 fiscal year that is attributed to the property tax shift from schools required by Chapter 282 of the Statutes of 1979.
(4)
(A)
(i)
On or before September 15, 1993, the county auditor shall determine an amount for each special district that is engaged in fire protection activities, as reported to the Controller for inclusion in the 1989–90 edition of the Financial Transactions Report Concerning Special Districts under the heading of “Fire Protection,” that is equal to the amount of revenue allocated to that special district from the Special District Augmentation Fund for fire protection activities in the 1992–93 fiscal
year. For purposes of the preceding sentence for counties of the second class, the phrase “amount of revenue allocated to that special district” means an amount of revenue that was identified for transfer to that special district, rather than the amount of revenue that was actually received by that special district pursuant to that transfer.
(ii)
In the case of a special district, other than a special district governed by the county board of supervisors or whose governing body is the same as the county board of supervisors, that is engaged in fire protection activities as reported to the Controller, the county auditor shall also determine the amount by which the district’s amount determined pursuant to paragraph (3) exceeds the amount by which its allocation was reduced by operation of former Section 98.6 in the 1992–93 fiscal year. This amount
shall be added to the amount otherwise determined for the district under this paragraph. In any county subject to former Section 98.65, 98.66, 98.67, or 98.68 in that same fiscal year, the county auditor shall determine for each special district that is engaged in fire protection activities an amount that is equal to the amount determined for that district pursuant to paragraph (3).
(B)
For purposes of this paragraph, a special district includes any special district that is allocated property tax revenue pursuant to this chapter and does not appear in the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts, but is engaged in fire protection activities and appears in the State Controller’s Report on Financial Transactions Concerning Counties.
(5)
The total amount of property taxes allocated to special districts by the county auditor as a result of paragraph (4) shall be subtracted from the amount of property tax revenues not allocated to special districts by the county auditor as a result of paragraph (3) to determine the amount to be deposited in the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund as specified in subdivision (d).
(6)
On or before September 30, 1993, the county auditor shall notify the Director of Finance of the net amount determined for special districts pursuant to paragraph (5).
(d)
(1)
The amount of property tax revenues not allocated to the county, city and county, cities within the county, and special districts as a result of the reductions required by subdivisions (a), (b),
and (c) shall instead be deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund established in each county or city and county pursuant to Section 97.2. The amount of revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund, derived from whatever source, shall be allocated pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and to community college districts, in total, in the same proportion that property tax revenues were distributed to school districts and county offices of education, in total, and community college districts, in total, during the 1992–93 fiscal year.
(2)
The county auditor shall, based on information provided by the county superintendent of schools pursuant to this paragraph, allocate that proportion of the revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to be allocated to school
districts and county offices of education only to those school districts and county offices of education within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The county superintendent of schools shall determine the amount to be allocated to each school district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per average daily attendance in each school district. For each county office of education, the allocation shall be made based on the historical split of base property tax revenue between the county office of education and school districts within the county. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to a school district or county office of education upon that district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity. If, after determining the amount to be
allocated to each school district and county office of education, the county superintendent of schools determines there are still additional funds to be allocated, the county superintendent of schools shall determine the remainder to be allocated in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue, excluding Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund moneys, per average daily attendance in each remaining school district, and on the basis of the historical split described above for each county office of education that is not an excess tax school entity, until all funds that would not result in a school district or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated. The county superintendent of schools may determine the amounts to be allocated between each school district and county office of education to ensure that all funds that would not result in a school district
or county office of education becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated.
(3)
The county auditor shall, based on information provided by the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges pursuant to this paragraph, allocate that proportion of the revenue in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to be allocated to community college districts only to those community college districts within the county that are not excess tax school entities, as defined in subdivision (n) of Section 95. The chancellor shall determine the amount to be allocated to each community college district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue per funded full-time equivalent student in each community college district. In no event shall any additional money be allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund to a community college
district upon that district becoming an excess tax school entity.
(4)
(A)
If, after making the allocation required pursuant to paragraph (2), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (3). If, after making the allocation pursuant to paragraph (3), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate those excess funds pursuant to paragraph (2). If, after determining the amount to be allocated to each community college district, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges shall determine the remainder to be allocated to each community college
district in inverse proportion to the amounts of property tax revenue, excluding Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund moneys, per funded full-time equivalent student in each remaining community college district that is not an excess tax school entity until all funds that would not result in a community college district becoming an excess tax school entity are allocated.
(B)
(i)
(I)
For the 1995–96 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall, subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), allocate those excess funds to the county superintendent of schools. Funds allocated pursuant to this subclause shall be counted as property
tax revenues for special education programs in augmentation of the amount calculated pursuant to Section 2572 of the Education Code, to the extent that those property tax revenues offset state aid for county offices of education and school districts within the county pursuant to Section 56836.15 of the Education Code.
(II)
For the 2007–08 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, both of the following apply:
(ia)
In allocating the revenues described in subclause (I), the auditor shall apportion funds to the appropriate special education local plan area to cover the amount determined in Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.
(ib)
Except as otherwise provided by sub-subclause (ia), property tax
revenues described in subclause (I) shall not be apportioned to special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education Code.
(III)
If, for the 2000–01 fiscal year or any fiscal year thereafter, any additional revenues remain after the implementation of subclauses (I) and (II), the auditor shall allocate those remaining revenues among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year.
(IV)
A county Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund shall not be required to provide funding for special education programs funded pursuant to Section 56836.173 of the Education
Code or any predecessor to that section for a fiscal year before the 2007–08 fiscal year that it has not already provided for these programs before the beginning of the 2007–08 fiscal year.
(ii)
For the 1995–96 fiscal year only, clause (i) shall not apply to the County of Mono and the amount allocated pursuant to clause (i) in the County of Marin shall not exceed five million dollars ($5,000,000).
(iii)
For the 1996–97 fiscal year only, the total amount of funds allocated by the auditor pursuant to clause (i) and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 shall not exceed that portion of two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) that corresponds to the county’s proportionate share of all moneys allocated pursuant to clause (i)
and clause (i) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 97.2 for the 1995–96 fiscal year. Upon the request of the auditor, the Department of Finance shall provide to the auditor all information in the department’s possession that is necessary for the auditor to comply with this clause.
(iv)
Notwithstanding clause (i) of this subparagraph, for the 1999–2000 fiscal year only, if, after making the allocations pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) and subparagraph (A), the auditor determines that there are still additional funds to be allocated, the auditor shall allocate the funds to the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant
fiscal year. The amount allocated pursuant to this clause shall not exceed eight million two hundred thirty-nine thousand dollars ($8,239,000), as appropriated in Item 6110-250-0001 of Section 2.00 of the Budget Act of 1999 (Chapter 50, Statutes of 1999).
(C)
For purposes of allocating the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the 1996–97 fiscal year, the auditor shall, after making the allocations for special education programs, if any, required by subparagraph (B), allocate all remaining funds among the county, cities, and special districts in proportion to the amounts of ad valorem property tax revenue otherwise required to be shifted from those local agencies to the county’s Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund for the relevant fiscal year. For purposes of ad valorem property tax revenue allocations for the 1997–98 fiscal year
and each fiscal year thereafter, no amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the county, a city, or a special district pursuant to this subparagraph shall be deemed to be an amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to that local agency in the prior fiscal year.
(5)
For purposes of allocations made pursuant to Section 96.1 for the 1994–95 fiscal year, the amounts allocated from the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to this subdivision, other than those amounts deposited in the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund pursuant to any provision of the Health and Safety Code, shall be deemed property tax revenue allocated to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in the prior fiscal year.

Legislative History

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