HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 2673
As Reported by House Committee On:
Economic Development, Agriculture & Trade
Finance
Title: An act relating to creating the local infrastructure financing tool demonstration program.
Brief Description: Providing tools for local infrastructure financing.
Sponsors: Representatives Linville, Ericksen, P. Sullivan, Buck, Ericks, Kilmer, Kessler, Grant, Walsh, B. Sullivan, Lantz, Morris, O'Brien, Conway, Morrell and Wallace.
Brief History:
Economic Development, Agriculture & Trade: 1/18/06, 1/27/06 [DPS];
Finance: 2/2/06, 2/7/06 [DPS2S(w/o EDAT)].
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AGRICULTURE & TRADE
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 17 members: Representatives Linville, Chair; Pettigrew, Vice Chair; Skinner, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Appleton, Bailey, Blake, Clibborn, Dunn, Grant, Haler, Kilmer, McCoy, Morrell, Quall, Strow, P. Sullivan and Wallace.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 6 members: Representatives Kristiansen, Ranking Minority Member; Buri, Chase, Holmquist, Kretz and Newhouse.
Staff: Tracey Taylor (786-7196).
Background:
Tax increment financing or community redevelopment financing is a method of redistributing
property tax collections within designated areas to finance infrastructure improvements
within these designated areas. However, attempts to authorize the use of state property taxes
revenue in Washington to finance such development have been struck down by the voters and
the courts. The main legal impediments under the State Constitution include: the
requirement that all property taxes must be uniform on the same class property within the
territorial limits of the authority levying the tax; the prohibition on the lending of state credit;
and the dedication of state property tax revenues to fund the common schools.
Sales and Use Tax
There is a 6.5 percent retail sales tax levied by the state on the selling price of tangible
personal property and certain services purchased at retail. In general, the tax applies to
goods, construction (including labor), repair of tangible personal property, lodging for less
than 30 days, telephone service, and participatory recreational activities. There are some
local taxes that are credited against the state sales tax, including the 2 percent hotel/motel tax
upon accommodations by cities and counties. There are also some exemptions, credits and
deferrals to the state retail tax.
There is a 6.5 percent use tax on items not subject to the state retail sales tax. This includes
purchases made from out-of-state sellers, purchases from sellers who are not required to
collect Washington sales tax, items produced for use by the producer, and gifts and prizes.
The tax is measured by the value of the item at the time of the first use within the state,
excluding any delivery charges.
Counties and cities may impose several local sales and use taxes at various rates and for
various purposes. The tax base is the same as under the state retail sales and use taxes. The
most widely utilized local sales and use taxes are the basic tax at a rate of 0.5 percent and an
optional tax at a rate of up to 0.5 percent. The funds may be used for any general purpose.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
The local infrastructure financing tool (LIFT) program is created to assist local government
promote economic development. The LIFT will consist of six demonstration public
improvement projects designed to increase private development in the area and that will
utilize increased property tax revenues, excess excise tax revenues and revenues generated
through a sales and use tax credited against the state sales and use tax in the revenue
development area (RDA) to finance the improvements.
The six LIFT demonstration projects are: the Port of Walla Walla Rail Ex infrastructure
project; the Bellingham waterfront redevelopment project; the Covington Elementary School
redevelopment project; the Grays Harbor Biomass Plant project; the Gig Harbor St.
Anthony's Hospital and retail area infrastructure project; and the Bothell Gateway project.
A RDA must include the demonstration project area. In addition, a RDA must be comprised
of contiguous tracts, lots, pieces or parcels of land and have less than $1 billion in assessed
value for the taxable real property within the RDA. The average assessed value per square
foot of the taxable land within the RDA may not exceed $70 per square foot. In addition, a
RDA cannot comprise more than 25 percent of the total assessed value of the taxable real
property within the boundaries of the local government creating the RDA. Boundaries cannot
be drawn in such a way as to purposely exclude parcels where economic development is
unlikely to occur and must be located in the demonstration project area.
Public Improvements
The LIFT must be used to finance public improvements, including: street and road
construction and maintenance; water and sewer system construction and improvements;
sidewalks and streetlights; parking, terminal, and dock facilities; transit authority park and
ride facilities; park facilities and recreational areas; storm water and drainage management
system; and affordable housing.
The LIFT may not be used to finance public stadiums currently funded by a public facilities
district. The LIFT must be used for public improvements identified within the capital
facilities, utilities, housing, or transportation elements of a comprehensive plan required by
the Growth Management Act (GMA), except public improvements that are considered
historical preservation activities. It must be expected to encourage private investment within
the RDA and to increase the fair market value of real property within the RDA.
The public improvement costs may include the costs of: design, planning, acquisition, site
preparation, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement and installation of
public improvements; demolishing, relocating, maintaining and operation of property
pending construction of the public improvements; the costs of financing the public
improvements; assessment incurred in revaluing real property and apportioning the taxes in
the RDA; and reasonably related administrative costs and feasibility studies.
Creating an Increment Area
The local government must have entered or expects to enter an agreement with a private
developer or have received a letter of intent from a private developer relating to the
developer's plans for private improvements within the RDA. Such private development must
be consistent with the countywide planning policy adopted by the county and the local
government's comprehensive plan.
The local government must make findings that the LIFT is not expected to be used for the
purpose of relocating a business from Washington, located outside the RDA, into the RDA
and it will improve the viability of existing business entities within the RDA. In addition, it
must find that the RDA is in need of economic development or redevelopment. The local
government must also find that the public improvements financed in whole or in part with the
LIFT are reasonably likely to:
Prior to adopting an ordinance creating a RDA, the local government must obtain written
agreement for the use of the LIFT to finance all or a portion of the costs of improvements
from any taxing district that levies real property or imposes a sales or use tax within the RDA
if the taxing district chooses to participate in the public improvement to the extent of
providing limited funding under the LIFT. The governing body of each participating taxing
district must authorize its participation. The local government planning to create a RDA
must also estimate the impact of the RDA on small business and low-income housing and
develop a mitigation plan for the impacted businesses and housing.
The ordinance must describe the public improvements, the boundaries of the RDA, estimate
the cost of the public improvements and the portion of these costs to be financed by the LIFT,
estimate the time during which regular property taxes and excess excise taxes are to be used
to finance the public improvement costs, provide the date when the apportionment of the
taxes will begin and making a finding that all conditions necessary to create a RDA are met.
A public hearing must be held at least 30 days before passage of the ordinance establishing
the RDA. The public hearing may be held either by the governing body of the local
government or by a committee of that body comprising at least a majority of the whole
governing body.
Notice of the public hearing on the proposed ordinance creating the RDA must be sent by
U.S. mail to all property owners and business enterprises located within the proposed RDA at
least 30 days prior to the hearing. The local government must consult with business
organizations and ethnic associations to develop methods of notice that ensure that
appropriate notice is provided to the business enterprises and property owners for whom
English is a second language.
Property Tax Accrued Value
The accrued value is 75 percent of any increase, over the tax allocation base value, in the
assessed value of real property in a revenue development area that is placed on the
assessment roles after the RDA is created. In calculating the regular property tax accrued
value, regular property taxes levied by voters for a specific purpose shall not be included.
Tax allocation base value is the accrued value of real property located within RDA for taxes
levied in the year in which the RDA is created for collection in the following year, plus 100
percent of any increase in the assessed value of real property located within a RDA that is
placed on the assessment rolls after the RDA is created, less the accrued value.
In the second calendar year following the effective date of the ordinance creating the RDA,
the county treasurer distributes the receipts from regular taxes on real property in the RDA as
follows:
(1) each participating taxing district and the local government that created the RDA shall
receive the portion of its regular property taxes by the rate of tax levied by or for the
taxing district on its tax allocation base value or upon the total assessed value of real
property in the taxing district, whichever is smaller; and
(2) the local government shall receive an additional portion of the regular property taxes
levied by it and by or for each participating taxing district upon the accrued value in
the RDA. If there is no accrued value, the local government does not receive any
additional regular property taxes.
The county assessor shall allocate any increase in the assessed real property value occurring
in the RDA to the tax allocation base value and the accrued value as appropriate.
Excess Excise Taxes
A local government that creates a RDA may use annually any excess excise taxes received by
it from taxable activity within the RDA to finance the public improvement costs financed in
whole or in part by local infrastructure financing. When tax allocation revenues are no longer
necessary or obligated to pay the costs of the public improvements, the local government may
no longer retain the excess excise taxes. Any participating taxing authority may allocate
excess excise taxes to the local government so long as the Department of Revenue (DOR) has
approved the local government's imposition of the additional local sales and use tax.
The excess excise tax is the amount of excise taxes received by a local government within the
RDA over and above the amount of excise taxes received there during the base year from
taxable income within the RDA. The base year is the first calendar year following the
creation of the RDA and the measurement year is a calendar year, beginning with the
calendar year following the base year, that is used annually to measure the amount of excess
excise taxes required to be used to finance the public improvement costs. However, if no
excise taxes were received in the RDA in the 12 months prior to the creation of the area, then
the excess excise taxes are the total amount of excise taxes received in each calendar year
after the area is created.
If a local government is solely a port district, the port district may use excess excise taxes
only to the extent that any other taxing authority that receives excise tax from taxable activity
in the RDA allocates excess excise taxes to the local government.
If a port district and a city, town or county is the RDA, excess excise taxes may only be used
if the city, town or county realize excess excise taxes from taxable activity within the RDA or
any other taxing authority that receives excise taxes from taxable activity in the RDA
allocates excess excise taxes to the local government.
Boundary information of the RDA is due to the DOR at least 75 days before effective date of
ordinance creating the RDA.
Sales and Use Tax
A city, town or county that creates a RDA and finances the public improvements under the
local infrastructure financing tool program may impose a sales and use tax. The tax is in
addition to other taxes authorized and will be collected from those who are taxable by the
state retail sales tax and use tax for any taxable event within the jurisdiction. The rate cannot
exceed 6.5 percent less the aggregate rates of any other taxes imposed on the same event that
are already credited against the state sales and use taxes. The tax shall be deducted from the
amount of taxes otherwise required to be collected or paid to the DOR for the state sales and
use tax.
The sales and use tax cannot be imposed until after January 1, 2007, and the local increment
jurisdiction must first have received tax allocation revenues derived from either real property
taxes or excess excise taxes or both during the preceding calendar year. The proceeds may
only be used for the payments of principal and interest on the bonds issued for the public
improvements financed through the local infrastructure financing. This tax expires when
bonds issued are retired, but not more than 30 years after being imposed.
In order to enact a sales and use tax, the local jurisdiction must first enact an ordinance
imposing tax that provides that:
(1) the tax shall first be imposed on the first day of a fiscal year;
(2) the amount of the tax received by the local government in any fiscal year shall not
exceed the state contribution;
(3) the tax shall cease to be imposed for the remainder of any fiscal year in which either:
(a) the amount of tax receipts totals the amount of the state contribution;
(b) the amount of the tax receipts totals the amount of local public sources dedicated
in the previous fiscal year to finance the authorized public improvements; or
(c) the amount of the revenue from taxes imposed under this section by all cities,
towns, and counties totals the annual state credit limit.
(4) the tax will be reimposed at the beginning of the next fiscal year if it ceased to be
imposed; and
(5) any revenue generated by the tax in excess of the amount of the state contribution
limit will go to the state.
Then, the jurisdiction must apply to the DOR at least 75 days before the effective date of any
such tax. The DOR will accept and approve applications beginning August 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2008. Application information shall include: information establishing the
jurisdiction is eligible to impose such a tax; the anticipated effective date of the tax; the
estimated number of years that the tax will be imposed; and a copy of the ordinance creating
the RDA.
The DOR will rule on an application within 60 days of receipt. The DOR will approve the
amount of the sales and use tax that an applicant may impose. The amount shall not exceed
the lesser of $1 million or the highest amount of tax revenue the applicant estimates it will
receive in any one fiscal year through the imposition of the sales and use tax.
If both a city and a county impose the sales and use tax under this program, the amount is
credited based on which jurisdiction created the RDA first.
State contribution means the lesser of $1 million or an amount equal to the state property tax
allocation revenues and the excess state excise taxes received by the state during the
preceding year.
The aggregate limit for credit against the state sales and use tax is $5 million. The DOR will
inform the jurisdiction to stop imposing the tax once the jurisdiction's annual state
contribution limit is reached or the aggregate state contribution limit is reached.
Local government must notify the DOR by March 1 the amount of local infrastructure
financing dedicated in the previous calendar year to finance the authorized public
improvement and the tax allocation revenues derived in the previous calendar year from the
regular property taxes on the accrued value and distributed to finance the public
improvements.
Money must be used only for the purpose of principal and interest payments on bonds issued
for a project and must be matched with an amount from local public sources dedicated
through December 31 of the previous calendar year to finance the authorized public
improvements. Local public sources can include private monetary contributions and tax
allocation revenues. The money generated from the sales and use tax must actually be
expended to pay public improvement costs or are required by law or an agreement to be used
exclusively to pay public improvement costs.
The new tax is available to a local jurisdiction as long as the jurisdiction has outstanding
indebtedness.
Accountability
The local government utilizing the sales and use tax must provide an annual report to the
DOR by March 1 of each year. The report must include:
(1) the amount of tax allocation revenues, sales and use tax and local public sources
received by the local government during the preceding calendar year, and how these
revenues were expended;
(2) the names, and previous business locations, of any business located within the RDA
as a result of the public improvements undertaken by the local government and
financed in whole or in part by this program;
(3) the total number of permanent jobs created as a result of the public improvements
undertaken by the local government and financed in whole or in part by this program;
(4) the average wages and benefits received by the employees of all businesses locating
within the RDA as a result of the public improvements; and
(5) the local government is complying with the requirement that the local infrastructure
financing proceeds are being used exclusively in the area within the jurisdiction
deemed in need of economic development and/or redevelopment.
The DOR shall make the report available to the public and the Legislature by June 1 of each
year. The report shall include a list of the public improvements undertaken by the local
governments and financed in whole or in part by community revitalization financing. The
report should also include a summary of the information provided by the local governments.
The full report by a local government to the DOR shall be made available to the public upon
request.
Bond Authorization
A local government designating an increment area and authorizing the use of community
revitalization financing may incur general indebtedness, and issue general obligation bonds or
revenue bonds, to finance the public improvements and retire the indebtedness in whole or in
part from tax allocations it receives.
Local government can annually pay into a fund to be established for the benefit of bonds
issued for this program a fixed proportion or fixed amount of any tax allocation revenues
derived from property or business activity within the increment area containing the public
improvements funded by the bonds. The payments continue until all bonds payable from the
fund are paid in full.
A local government can annually pay into a second fund a fixed proportion or fixed amount
of any revenues derived from the credit of the state sales and excise tax, such payment
continuing until all bonds from the fund are paid in full.
A local government that issues bonds to finance public improvements may pledge for
payment of such bonds all or part of any tax allocation revenues derived from the public
improvements. It can also pledge the revenues of the credit of the state sales and excise tax.
The bonds issued by the local government to finance the public improvements do not
constitute an obligation of the state.
Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) Study
Beginning September 1, 2013, and continuing every five years thereafter, the JLARC must
submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the effectiveness of the LIFT program, including
a project-by-project review. The year 2028 report must also include any recommendations
regarding whether or not the LIFT program should be expanded statewide and what impact
the expansion would have on Washington's economic development.
Miscellaneous
Nothing in the Act gives port districts the right to impose a local sales or use tax.
The DOR may adopt rules required to administer the community revitalization financing
program.
The LIFT program expires June 30, 2039.
Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:
The requirement that the LIFT may not displace financing funds that have historically been
dedicated to public improvements. The prohibition on using the LIFT funds to finance
commercial or office space, hotels, industrial parks, retail or shopping centers is removed.
The local government must also find that the LIFT will improve the viability of the existing
communities and increase private residential and commercial investment within the RDA.
The requirement that "but for" the LIFT, the development or redevelopment would not
happen is eliminated. The waiting period between the public hearing and the adoption of
ordinance is reduced from 60 days to 30 days. The expulsion of the local government from
the LIFT program for failing to file a timely annual report is eliminated. A definition of
"excess excise taxes" is provided.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect on July 1, 2006.
Testimony For: (In support) Local governments are desperate for tools for economic
development. This tool is available in over 45 states and will allow Washington
communities to compete, especially with our neighboring states, in developing and
redeveloping our communities to provide housing and jobs for its citizens. Ready lands
make for ready jobs. The fiscal note does not show the increases in other tax revenues, like
employment, business and occupation, and sales and use taxes on purchases, that will go to
the state as the result of the development financed by the LIFT.
(In support with suggestions) Had LIFT passed in the past, many cities could have developed
or developed faster. Under our legal structure infrastructure is the one major thing that cities
can provide to encourage development and redevelopment. Although the demonstration
project approach makes sense, we would prefer some placeholders for projects to compete for
in the future.
(In support with technical issues) There are several technical issues that can be resolved and
we will work with staff to resolve them.
Testimony Against: None.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Dick Little, City of Bellingham; Steve Burdick, City of
Vancouver; Jim Justin, Association of Washington Cities; Ron Newbry, Washington
Economic Development Association; Michael Morales, City of Yakima; Greg Hanon,
National Association of Industrial Office Properties; and Rick Slunaker, Associated General
Contractors.
(In support with suggestions) Doug Levy, Cities of Everett, Kent, Federal Way, Renton and
Puyallup.
(In support with technical issues) Julie Sexton, Washington Association of Counties.
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
Majority Report: The second substitute bill be substituted therefor and the second substitute bill do pass and do not pass the substitute bill by Committee on Economic Development, Agriculture & Trade. Signed by 6 members: Representatives McIntire, Chair; Hunter, Vice Chair; Conway, Ericks, Hasegawa and Santos.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 5 members: Representatives Orcutt, Ranking Minority Member; Roach, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Ahern, Condotta and Shabro.
Staff: Mark Matteson (786-7145).
Background:
No changes recommended.
Summary of Recommendation of Committee On Finance Compared to
Recommendation of Committee On Economic Development, Agriculture & Trade:
Limits the local resources that can be used to match state funds to only the tax allocation
revenues within the revenue development area or private contributions. Requires for the first
year of imposing the new state-shared tax that the local match must contain a proportion of
property tax revenue to sales and use tax revenue that is similar to the proportion received by
the sponsoring jurisdiction as a whole over the previous six years. Requires the JLARC
report to compare the revenues received under the local infrastructure financing tool program
with the change in assessed value within the improvement area. Makes technical
modifications to clarify administrative provisions.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect July 1, 2006.
Testimony For: This is not a new idea. Over the interim, we spent a great deal of time to
come up with a more limited tool that addressed concerns previously expressed. We started
by using Rep. Santos' approach and, while the bill does not require actual mitigation, there
are a number of other accountability provisions. Please don't focus on the list, rather on the
technical aspects.
The Governor is interested in this concept and would like to keep this proposal moving.
While there may be some technical issues, this is the latest proposal in a longstanding effort
to create this kind of program.
The Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority is in support of this. The mayor would
very much like to see a tool like this available for Bremerton's boardwalk project. The
project has both educational and recreational aspects to it. Funds will help with the sewerage
infrastructure upgrades.
The City of University Place lost a quarter of its general revenues when the Motor Vehicle
Excise Tax was repealed. We are looking for financing tools that will help us redevelop the
city center. The $167 million proposal will result in an integrated retail, residential, and
office urban village that comports with the Livable Communities initiative.
The Association of Washington Cities supports this concept. This is a sorely needed
economic development tool. In the Job Development Fund that you created last year, the
Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development has received over 150
applications but can fund only a fraction of those. This shows the demand for economic
development assistance. We support this as a tool but do not support any one project in
particular. We believe the bill includes adequate protections. There are growth goals,
required reporting, and a statewide cap.
The National Association of Industrial Properties likes tax increment financing. Washington
does not have this. While the bill is a narrow slice, it is a first step toward this objective.
The money is for public infrastructure needed to support private development. Many times
those infrastructure needs have been delayed for lack of funding. This will help. The
restrictions in the underlying bill on certain commercial development was too burdensome.
Testimony Against: None.
Persons Testifying: Representative Linville, prime sponsor; Marc Baldwin, Governor's Office; Christy Lubovich, Kitsap County Consolidated Housing; Eric Faison, City of University Place; Jim Justin, Association of Washington Cities; and Greg Hanon, National Association of Industrial Properties.