California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB336

Introduced
1/27/21  
Refer
2/12/21  
Report Pass
3/25/21  
Engrossed
4/8/21  
Engrossed
4/8/21  
Refer
4/8/21  
Refer
4/8/21  
Refer
5/12/21  
Refer
5/12/21  
Report Pass
6/10/21  
Report Pass
6/10/21  
Enrolled
6/17/21  
Enrolled
6/17/21  
Chaptered
6/28/21  
Chaptered
6/28/21  

Caption

Enhanced infrastructure financing districts: public financing authority: members: joint powers authorities.

Impact

The bill impacts state laws by ensuring the public financing authority for enhanced infrastructure financing districts includes members from relevant legislative bodies, which can lead to more coherent and coordinated infrastructure projects. The governance structure now allows legislative body members who are involved in the public financing authority to also engage in joint powers agreements, thereby enhancing collaborative governance. This amendment is crucial for increasing the efficiency of infrastructure financing initiatives and ensuring they align with local agency interests.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 336, introduced by Villapudua, amends Section 53398.51.1 of the Government Code concerning enhanced infrastructure financing districts. The bill primarily seeks to clarify the composition and governance of the public financing authority that oversees these districts. Under the new provisions, it establishes that members of the legislative body from the affected taxing entities can also serve on the governing body of joint powers authorities. This facilitates a more streamlined decision-making process and promotes cooperation among different agencies for effective public infrastructure financing and development.

Sentiment

Discussions surrounding AB 336 were largely positive among proponents who viewed it as a necessary step for enhancing local governance capabilities and improving collaboration across different levels of government. It has been recognized as a progressive move towards better resource management and financial empowerment at the local level. However, some stakeholders expressed concerns about the potential dilution of accountability and the importance of maintaining clear lines between different governance bodies.

Contention

Notable points of contention included fears that blending roles could compromise the clear accountability expected from separate governance bodies. Detractors argued that while collaboration is beneficial, it must not lead to overlapping responsibilities that could obfuscate accountability. Conversely, supporters contended that the flexibility afforded by this bill is essential for addressing the complexities inherent in local infrastructure projects and fostering an environment of cooperation among public entities.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB696

Enhanced infrastructure financing districts: housing: underutilized or deteriorated retail property: covenants and restrictions: eminent domain.

CA SB780

Local finance: public investment authorities.

CA SB852

Climate resilience districts: formation: funding mechanisms.

CA SB1389

Public investment authorities.

CA SB616

Community Hardening Commission: wildfire mitigation program.

CA AB897

Office of Planning and Research: regional climate networks: regional climate adaptation and resilience action plans.

CA AB2553

Vertical housing districts.

CA AB2610

Protected species: authorized take: System Conservation Implementation Agreement.