Bill Text: CA AB2797 | 2015-2016 | Regular Session | Amended
NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: City and County of San Francisco: Mission Bay South
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Passed) 2016-09-23 - Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 529, Statutes of 2016. [AB2797 Detail]
Download: California-2015-AB2797-Amended.html
Bill Title: City and County of San Francisco: Mission Bay South
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Passed) 2016-09-23 - Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 529, Statutes of 2016. [AB2797 Detail]
Download: California-2015-AB2797-Amended.html
BILL NUMBER: AB 2797 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 19, 2016
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 22, 2016
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 13, 2016
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 5, 2016
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 29, 2016
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Chiu
FEBRUARY 19, 2016
An act to amend Sections 4 and 7 of, and to add Section 4.5 to,
Chapter 660 of the Statutes of 2007, relating to tidelands and
submerged lands.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2797, as amended, Chiu. City and County of San Francisco:
Mission Bay South Project: redevelopment plan.
Existing law grants to the City and County of San Francisco the
right, title, and interest of the state in and to certain tidelands
and submerged lands in trust for certain purposes. Under existing
law, the Burton Act, and the Burton Act transfer agreement, the
interest of the state in and to the Harbor of San Francisco was
transferred in trust to the City and County of San Francisco. The
State Lands Commission has jurisdiction over tidelands and submerged
lands of the state.
Existing law declares that, until January 1, 2094, certain parcels
of real property denominated as the designated seawall lots are free
from the use requirements of the public trust, the Burton Act trust,
and the Burton Act transfer agreement, and authorizes the San
Francisco Port Commission to lease all or a portion of the designated
seawall lots for nontrust uses if specified conditions are met,
including that the lease shall terminate no later than January 1,
2094.
This bill would revise those conditions to specify that the term
of a nontrust lease shall not exceed 75 years from the initial
occupancy date date, as defined, of the
improvements developed on the leased site or development parcel, and
in no event shall the term of a nontrust lease extend beyond
December 31, 2120. 2105. The bill would
also prescribe the boundaries of a specified seawall lot for
purposes of the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan. The bill would
authorize the port to use its nontrust lease revenues from specified
development parcels in a specified seawall lot to make port advances,
as defined, to fund specified infrastructure if the commission has
approved the port advances and complies with certain procedures for
the disposition of those parcels, as prescribed.
This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to
the necessity of a special statute for the waterfront property at the
Mission Bay South redevelopment area in the City and County of San
Francisco.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. For the purposes of this act the following terms have
the following meanings:
(a) "Assembly Bill 26" means Chapter 5 of the First Extraordinary
Session of the Statutes of 2011, in which certain provisions were
amended by Chapter 26 of the Statutes of 2012, effective as provided
in California Redevelopment Assn. v. Matosantos (2011) 53 Cal.4th
231.
(b) "Assembly Bill 2649" means Chapter 757 of the Statutes of
2012.
(c) "Bay Plan" means the San Francisco Bay Plan as adopted and
administered by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development
Commission pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act.
(d) "BCDC" means the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission established pursuant to Section 66620 of the
Government Code.
(e) "Board of supervisors" means the Board of Supervisors of the
City and County of San Francisco.
(f) "Burton Act" means Chapter 1333 of the Statutes of 1968, as
amended, which authorized the state to convey to the city, in trust
and subject to certain terms, conditions, and reservations, the state'
s interest in certain tidelands, including filled lands.
(g) "Burton Act lands" means the tidelands that the state granted
to the city under the Burton Act, including the San Francisco
waterfront from the Hyde Street pier to India Basin.
(h) "Burton Act transfer agreement" means the agreement dated
January 24, 1969, between the state and the city, relating to the
transfer of the Burton Act lands from the state to the city, and any
amendments to that agreement in accordance with its terms.
(i) "Burton Act trust" means the statutory trust imposed by the
Burton Act on Burton Act lands and lands dedicated to or acquired by
the city as assets of the trust.
(j) "CFD law" means the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of
1982 (Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311)) of Part 1 of
Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code) or the San Francisco
Special Tax Financing Law (San Francisco Admin. Code Ch. 43, Art. X),
as applicable.
(k) "City" means the City and County of San Francisco, a charter
city and county, and includes the port.
(l) "Commission" means the State Lands Commission.
(m) "Designated seawall lot" or "designated seawall lots" means
any of those parcels of real property situated in the city that are
defined as designated seawall lots in Senate Bill 815 or Assembly
Bill 2649, modified by Section 3 of this act.
(n) "Development parcel" means a portion of a designated seawall
lot that is subdivided for construction of improvements, or
rehabilitation of historic buildings for reuse, and that will be used
for nontrust land uses.
(o) "Embarcadero Historic District" means the portion of the
Burton Act lands from Pier 45 to Pier 48, which was listed on the
National Register of Historic Places in 2006.
(p) "IFD law" means the provisions of the Government Code
authorizing the formation of local financing districts authorized to
use property tax increment to finance infrastructure.
(q) "Infrastructure costs" or "costs of infrastructure" means the
cost of constructing the Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure, including
related costs of planning and design work and a return on developer
equity, as provided in a plan of finance in a disposition and
development agreement.
(r) "Initial occupancy date" means means,
for each designated seawall lot other Seawall Lot 337, and for each
development parcel in Seawall Lot 337, the date on which the
port issues the first certificate of occupancy for a building under
a the first nontrust lease of
a the designated seawall lot or of a
the development parcel in Seawall Lot 337, as
applicable.
(s) "McAteer-Petris Act" means Title 7.2 (commencing with Section
66600) of the Government Code.
(t) "Mission Bay developer" means an "owner," as defined in the
Mission Bay South owner participation agreement.
(u) "Mission Bay South owner participation agreement" means the
agreement between the redevelopment agency and Catellus Development
Corporation, dated November 16, 1998, as amended.
(v) "Mission Bay South redevelopment plan" means the Redevelopment
Plan for the Mission Bay South Project adopted by the board of
supervisors on October 26, 1998, as amended.
(w) "Mission Bay South redevelopment project area" means the area
in the city subject to the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan.
(x) "Nontrust lease revenues" means revenues that the port
receives from leases of designated seawall lots or development
parcels in Seawall Lot 337, as applicable, where the trust use
restrictions have been lifted by a prior legislative act for a
designated period of time.
(y) "Nontrust sources" means sources of consideration other than
nontrust lease revenues or moneys in the port's harbor fund. Nontrust
sources include, without limitation, fee credits that may be applied
to offset local impact fees or exactions, special taxes, tax
increment, proceeds of general obligation bonds, proceeds of
community facilities bonds, and proceeds of tax allocation bonds.
(z) "Northeastern waterfront" means the area designated in the
special area plan as the land and water areas within port
jurisdiction from Pier 35 to China Basin.
(aa) "Oversight board" means the body that the board of
supervisors created to oversee the fiscal management of the successor
agency in accordance with Assembly Bill 26.
(ab) "Parcel P20" means a parcel owned by the port within the
Mission Bay South redevelopment project area that lies partially
within the southern portion of Seawall Lot 337.
(ac) "Port advances" means a loan of nontrust lease revenues from
Seawall Lot 337 to a district or other entity providing project-based
public financing to pay directly or to reimburse the Seawall Lot 337
developer for costs of infrastructure in accordance with the terms
and conditions of this act. Port advances do not include nontrust
lease revenues that the port uses to pay directly for the
preservation of historic piers and historic structures or for
purposes that are otherwise authorized by this act.
(ad) "Port of San Francisco," "port commission," or "port" means
the city acting by and through the San Francisco Port Commission.
(ae) "Project-based public financing" means special taxes from
development parcels in community facilities district project areas
formed under CFD law, property tax increment from development parcels
in infrastructure financing district project areas established under
IFD law, bond proceeds secured by special taxes, tax increment, or
both, and any other mechanisms available to finance infrastructure
and public facilities that rely on revenues produced by the area to
be improved.
(af) "Public trust" means the common law public trust for
commerce, navigation, and fisheries.
(ag) "Redevelopment agency" means the San Francisco redevelopment
agency, that the board of supervisors formed under the former
California Community Redevelopment Law and that was dissolved on
February 1, 2012, by operation of Assembly Bill 26.
(ah) "San Francisco Bay" or "bay" means those areas defined by
Section 66610 of the Government Code.
(ai) "San Francisco waterfront" means the portions of San
Francisco Bay that the state transferred to the city under the Burton
Act.
(aj) "Seaport plan" means the San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan
adopted by BCDC and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, as
amended in 2003.
(ak) "Seawall Lot 337" means that parcel of real property in the
city designated as Seawall Lot 337, as shown on that certain map
entitled "revised map of designated seawall lots," which is on file
with the port, as those boundaries may be modified by Section 3 of
this act.
(al) "Seawall Lot 337 developer" means the person selected by the
port to negotiate exclusively with the port for the master
development of Seawall Lot 337 and Pier 48, and its successors and
authorized assigns.
(am) "Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure" means infrastructure and
other public facilities that serve Seawall Lot 337 and are located on
Seawall Lot 337 or on lands immediately adjacent to the seawall lot
area, such as water, sewer, stormwater management, and other utility
installations, streets, roadways, sidewalks, parks, public access and
open space areas, shoreline improvements, and other public
facilities.
(an) "Senate Bill 815" means Chapter 660 of the Statutes of 2007,
as amended by Chapter 208 of the Statutes of 2009.
(ao) "Southern waterfront" means the area designated in the
special area plan as the land and water areas within port
jurisdiction from China Basin to and including India Basin.
(ap) "Special area plan" means BCDC's San Francisco Waterfront
Special Area Plan, adopted in 1975 as an amendment to the Bay Plan,
as amended.
(aq) "State" means the State of California.
(ar) "Successor agency" means the San Francisco Office of
Community Investment and Infrastructure, which the board of
supervisors created in accordance with Assembly Bill 26 to serve as
the successor to the redevelopment agency.
(as) "Successor agency commission" means the San Francisco
Commission on Community Investment and Infrastructure.
(at) "Tidelands" means the lands lying below the elevation of
ordinary high water, whether filled or unfilled, and includes
submerged lands.
(au) "Waterfront land use plan" means the Port of San Francisco
Waterfront Land Use Plan, including its waterfront design and access
element, adopted by the port commission in 1997, as amended.
SEC. 1.5. As used in Senate Bill 815 and Assembly Bill 2649, each
term set forth in Section 1 of this act shall have the meaning
ascribed to it in that section and, in the event of any conflict
between this act and Senate Bill 815 or Assembly Bill 2649, this act
shall prevail.
SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The seawall lots are tidelands that were filled and cut off
from the waterfront by the construction of the great seawall in the
late 19th and early 20th centuries, and by the construction of the
Embarcadero roadway which lies, in part, over a portion of the great
seawall. Over time, some seawall lots, including the designated
seawall lots, have ceased to be useful in whole or in part for the
promotion of the public trust and the Burton Act trust, except for
the production of revenue to support the Burton Act trust. The
designated seawall lots are either vacant or leased on an interim
basis, primarily for parking.
(b) Seawall Lot 337, the largest of the designated seawall lots,
is located just south of China Basin and used as a surface parking
lot. Senate Bill 815 depicts Seawall Lot 337 as bounded by Mission
Rock Street, Terry A. Francois Boulevard, and Third Street. The port
commission entered into exclusive negotiations with the Seawall Lot
337 developer for the lease, construction, and operation of a
proposed project at Seawall Lot 337, a portion of Terry A. Francois
Boulevard, Pier 48, and the marginal wharf between Pier 48 and Pier
50. The Legislature finds that the revitalization of Seawall Lot 337
and Pier 48 is of particular importance to the state.
(c) The Mission Bay South redevelopment project area lies to the
west and south of Seawall Lot 337. Parcel P20, based on the Mission
Bay South redevelopment plan, is a narrow, undeveloped strip of land
within the Mission Bay South redevelopment project area that is
bounded on the north by the northern line of Mission Rock Street in
its former location, and overlaps a portion of Seawall Lot 337. In
accordance with the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan, the Mission
Bay developer has since realigned Mission Rock Street from its
northeasterly orientation to an east-west orientation, such that a
portion of Parcel P20 and the former Mission Rock Street right of way
now lie north of the northerly line of Mission Rock Street. The
development proposal for Seawall Lot 337 includes this portion of
Parcel P20 and the former Mission Rock Street.
(d) Under the development proposal, the Seawall Lot 337 developer
would realign Terry A. Francois Boulevard and use part of the
northern section of the street to expand China Basin Park. The
remaining portion of the realigned Terry A. Francois Boulevard would
be a working waterfront street that would support active maritime,
industrial, and production uses at the waterfront. Terry A. Francois
Boulevard would include areas for social spaces and loading zones
serving buildings, a pedestrian throughway, a shared zone, and the
Blue Greenway adjacent to the bay and Piers 48 and 50, facilitating
uninterrupted public access along San Francisco's eastern waterfront.
(e) A substantial investment in new infrastructure and public
facilities is necessary for the port to fully realize the public
benefits of the portions of Seawall Lot 337 that will be used for
public trust purposes, and to maximize the value of development
parcels that will be subject to nontrust leases. The infrastructure
costs for Seawall Lot 337 are expected to exceed one hundred fifty
million dollars ($150,000,000) based on estimates presented to the
port commission when it endorsed a term sheet for the project in
2013. The development proposal provides for the Seawall Lot 337
developer to construct the necessary infrastructure and public
facilities, which would be funded by developer equity to the extent
that port land value is unavailable. Project-based public financing
would be used to pay directly or to reimburse the Seawall Lot 337
developer for its equity advances for infrastructure costs under CFD
law, IFD law, and other applicable laws.
(f) Project-based public financing, which includes special taxes,
property tax increment, and other nontrust funding sources arising
from the project may not become available until after the port
receives nontrust lease revenues from development parcels in Seawall
Lot 337. The port may have the opportunity to loan nontrust lease
revenues for Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure costs for the purpose of
reducing financing costs and maximizing the land value to the port to
generate additional revenue that can be used for preservation of the
port's historic piers and structures and for other public trust
uses.
(g) In 1965, the Legislature adopted the McAteer-Petris Act to
protect and enhance San Francisco Bay and its natural resources.
Among other things, the McAteer-Petris Act grants BCDC regulatory
authority over further filling in San Francisco Bay and limits that
activity to: (1) water-oriented uses that meet specified criteria;
(2) minor fill that improves shoreline appearance or public access;
and (3) activities necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of
the public in the entire bay area. The McAteer-Petris Act also
directs BCDC to require the provision of maximum feasible public
access to the bay and its shoreline consistent with a project.
(h) In 1969, the Legislature received and acted upon BCDC's report
and recommendations from a three-year study of San Francisco Bay.
The resulting Bay Plan includes BCDC's policies to guide use and
protection of all areas within BCDC's jurisdiction and ensures that
proposed projects minimize bay fill and provide maximum feasible
public access to the bay.
(i) Bay Plan policy concerning filling for bay-oriented commercial
recreation and bay-oriented public assembly on privately owned or
publicly owned property, also known as the replacement fill policy,
provides in part that BCDC may permit fill on publicly owned land for
bay-oriented commercial recreation and bay-oriented public assembly
if certain conditions are met, including all of the following:
(1) The fill is a replacement pier that covers less of the bay
than the area that is being uncovered.
(2) The amount of bay-oriented commercial recreation or
bay-oriented public assembly use covers no more than 50 percent of
the area of the bay uncovered.
(3) The remainder of the replaced pier (50 percent) shall be used
for public recreation, public access, or open space, including open
water.
(j) The application of the replacement fill policy to the piers
along the northeastern waterfront created substantial challenges to
port and BCDC efforts to improve the waterfront. In part to address
this issue, BCDC and the port, together with the Save San Francisco
Bay Association and numerous community groups and individuals,
undertook a planning process that resulted in amendments to the port'
s waterfront land use plan and BCDC's special area plan. Those
amendments focused on the northeastern waterfront with the goal of
achieving the following objectives:
(1) Reconnecting the city to its waterfront.
(2) Increasing open water, public access, and opportunities to
enjoy the San Francisco waterfront in a manner that completes the
open space and public access network in the northeastern waterfront.
(3) Providing for new development that attracts people to the bay
and increases revenue to the port and the city.
(4) Preserving historic resources and waterfront urban form.
(k) The special area plan amendments focused primarily on the
northeastern waterfront and prescribed certain actions to implement
the plan, including all of the following:
(1) Establishing a joint design review process for projects on the
northeastern waterfront, leading to the creation of the Waterfront
Design Advisory Committee.
(2) Requiring the port to prepare a nomination of the northeastern
waterfront from Pier 35 to China Basin as an historic district
listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
(3) Authorizing BCDC, through its permitting authority, to set
aside otherwise applicable use limitations on new bay fill, including
the replacement fill policy, as a means to provide an integrated
package of public benefits that prescribed removal of specified
piers, restoration of significant open water areas, completion of the
waterfront-wide, integrated public access network, preservation of
significant historic resources, and development of new uses in the
interests of the health, safety, or welfare of the public throughout
the bay area.
(l) The special area plan amendments did not affect the
application of the replacement fill policy to piers north of Pier 35
or south of China Basin. BCDC, the port, and other participants
assumed that then-dominant industrial and maritime activities south
of China Basin would continue and grow. The entire southern
waterfront, including Pier 48 and about six acres of Seawall Lot 337
adjacent to the piers, remained designated as a port priority use
area in the seaport plan to accommodate growth in neo-bulk and break
bulk cargo activities.
(m) At the time the special area plan amendments were being
drafted, it was not known that Pier 48 would be eligible for listing
on the National Register of Historic Places. In the course of
preparing the nomination report for the Embarcadero Historic
District, the port discovered that Pier 48 is a contributing resource
to the district. As a result, the district, which was listed in the
National Register of Historic Places in 2006, extends south of China
Basin to include Pier 48.
(n) The historic use of Pier 48 for break bulk cargo operations is
no longer viable due to a number of factors, including the
construction of the Embarcadero roadway and Terry A. Francois
Boulevard, elimination of rail service to the piers, and the
inability of finger piers to accommodate modern containerized cargo
operations. The port operates a break bulk facility at Pier 80, which
has unused capacity for break bulk cargo. Pier 48 maritime berths
are currently used for maritime industrial purposes.
(o) Pier 48 is ideally situated to provide public access to and
enjoyment of the waterfront and bay. It is within walking distance of
the Ferry Building, AT&T Park, and regional transit hubs, including
the Transbay Transit Center, which is under construction, and has
views of the bay, the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, and the
Brannan Street Wharf. The proposed reuse of Pier 48 includes
visitor-serving uses, public access, historic rehabilitation of the
pier consistent with the United States Interior Secretary's Standards
for Rehabilitation, berthing facilities, and other uses. This act
amends the seaport plan and the special area plan to allow Pier 48 to
be treated similarly to the other finger piers in the Embarcadero
Historic District and to remove the port priority use area
designation from Pier 48.
SEC. 3. If the adjacent streets and park areas are realigned or
reconfigured in connection with the development of Seawall Lot 337,
the boundaries of Seawall Lot 337 shall be revised to conform to the
realigned or reconfigured park or street boundaries, if the new
boundaries are approved by the executive officer of the commission.
The executive officer of the commission may require that a legal
description and record of survey be approved by the
commission in conjunction with the approvals required in paragraph
(3) of subdivision (a) of Section 4.5 of Senate Bill 815, as added by
this act. commission.
SEC. 4. Subdivisions (c), (d), and (f) of Section 34163 of the
Health and Safety Code, and subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 34164
of the Health and Safety Code, shall not apply to, and no action of
the Department of Finance or the Controller shall be required for,
any action taken by the oversight board, the successor agency
commission, the board of supervisors, or any other governmental body
required to act to amend the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan to
remove Parcel P20 from the Mission Bay South redevelopment project
area, or to amend any related documents or agreements to delete
regulatory requirements, zoning controls, and the Mission Bay
developer's obligations with respect to Parcel P20.
SEC. 5. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Assembly Bill
2649, (a) a nontrust lease of Seawall Lot 322-1 may be entered into
for the same duration as permitted for other designated seawall lots,
as provided in subdivision (a) (c) of
Section 4 of Senate Bill 815, as amended by this act, (b) the
operative date of Sections 3 to 5, inclusive, of Assembly Bill 2649
shall be coterminous with the operative date of Sections 3, 4, 4.5,
and 6 of Senate Bill 815, as provided in Section 7 of Senate Bill
815, as amended by this act, and (c) the requirements pertaining to
structures, buildings, and appurtenances on Seawall Lot 322-1 shall
be the same as for other designated seawall lots as provided in
Section 7 of Senate Bill 815, as amended by this act.
SEC. 6. The Legislature, in the exercise of its retained power as
trustee of the public trust, and in view of the unique circumstances
existing at Seawall Lot 337 and Pier 48 on the San Francisco
waterfront, hereby authorizes the following:
(a) Pier 48, the wharf between Pier 48 and Pier 50, and the
portion of Seawall Lot 337 currently designated for port priority use
are no longer required for port priority use and shall be deemed
free of the port priority use area designation as of January 1, 2017.
BCDC and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall reprint
the seaport plan to reflect the removal of the port priority use
designation from these areas, but this subdivision shall apply
regardless of whether the conforming changes have been made.
(b) As of January 1, 2017, the special area plan is amended to
include Pier 48 in the northeastern waterfront, which shall be deemed
to serve the health, safety, and welfare of the entire bay area, and
BCDC is authorized to issue a major permit for a project at Pier 48
applying the special area plan policies and other criteria applicable
to finger piers in the northeastern waterfront, including that the
replacement fill policy shall not apply to that project, if the
project will rehabilitate Pier 48 consistent with the United States
Interior Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation. BCDC shall reprint
the special area plan to reflect the inclusion of Pier 48 in the
northeastern waterfront, but this subdivision shall apply to the Pier
48 project regardless of whether the conforming changes have been
made.
(c) Nothing in this act is intended to limit the authority and
discretion of BCDC to approve or deny permits for the mixed-use
development on Pier 48 and the marginal wharf between Pier 48 and
Pier 50 generally described in this act in a manner consistent with
the McAteer-Petris Act or the policies of the Bay Plan and the
special area plan, as those policies are modified by subdivisions (a)
and (b), including the authority and discretion of BCDC to impose
conditions on the permits for the project. This act shall not limit
the authority and discretion of BCDC to enforce permits issued for
the projects described in this act.
SEC. 7. Section 4 of Chapter 660 of the Statutes of 2007 is
amended to read:
Sec. 4. (a) As used in this act, "nontrust lease" means a lease of
all or any portion of the designated seawall lots free from the use
requirements established by the public trust, the Burton Act trust,
and the Burton Act transfer agreement.
(b) Except for Seawall Lot 337, the port may enter into a nontrust
lease subject to the requirements of this section. For Seawall Lot
337, the port may enter into a nontrust lease subject to the
requirements of this section, if the commission has made all
approvals required in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section
4.5, and all of the conditions in Section 6 are met.
(c) Notwithstanding the Burton Act, Section 718 of the Civil Code,
Section 37384 of the Government Code, or any other provision of law
to the contrary, the term of any individual nontrust lease, including
any extension of the term allowed by right of renewal, shall not
exceed 75 years from the initial occupancy date of the improvements
developed on the leased site or development parcel, and in no event
shall the term of a nontrust lease extend beyond December 31,
2120. 2105. The port shall provide the
commission notice of the initial occupancy date of the improvements
developed on any leased site or development parcel. Nothing in this
section shall be construed as limiting the term of any lease, or
portion thereof, that is for uses consistent with the public trust
and the Burton Act.
(d) (1) (A) Except as provided in this subdivision, all nontrust
lease revenues received by the port shall be deposited in a separate
account in the harbor fund to be expended for the preservation of
historic piers and historic structures, or for the construction and
maintenance of waterfront plazas and open space.
(B) The port may use its nontrust lease revenues from development
parcels in Seawall Lot 337 to make port advances to fund Seawall Lot
337 infrastructure
if the commission has approved the port advances under paragraph (3)
of subdivision (a) of Section 4.5. This subparagraph shall not limit
the port's authority to use nontrust lease revenues for facilities
for which expenditures are authorized under subparagraph (A).
(C) Revenues shall not be expended under this subdivision for
historic piers or historic structures on land subject to public trust
use restrictions unless the executive officer of the commission has
approved the proposed uses of the pier or structure.
(2) The port may annually transfer from the separate account and
deposit in the general account of the harbor fund, to be used for any
purpose consistent with the public trust and the Burton Act, an
amount equal to the sum of the baseline revenue streams for each
designated seawall lot subject to one or more nontrust leases (leased
seawall lots), less any revenues received by the port, for the year
preceding the transfer of funds, from any portion or portions of the
leased seawall lots that were not subject to a nontrust lease. For
purposes of this subdivision, the baseline revenue stream for a
designated seawall lot is the average annual revenue received by the
port from that seawall lot over the five years prior to January 1,
2008, adjusted for inflation.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, the term "revenue" shall
exclude any costs incurred by the port to administer the lease and to
operate and maintain the leased property and any improvements
thereon.
(4) For each nontrust lease of a designated seawall lot, the port
shall maintain a separate accounting of all revenues transferred
pursuant to paragraph (2), all costs excluded pursuant to paragraph
(3), and all revenues deposited into the separate account. Upon
request, the port shall submit to the commission a copy of the
accountings described in this paragraph.
(5) If the funds in the separate account exceed the amount needed
for the preservation of historic piers and historic structures and
for construction of waterfront plazas and open space, the excess
funds shall be deposited in the harbor fund to be used for purposes
consistent with the public trust and the Burton Act.
(e) A nontrust lease shall be for fair market value and on terms
consistent with prudent land management practices as determined by
the port and subject to approval by the commission as provided in
paragraph (1) or as provided in Section 4.5 for a nontrust lease for
Seawall Lot 337.
(1) Prior to executing a nontrust lease, the port shall submit the
proposed lease to the commission for its consideration, and the
commission shall grant its approval or disapproval in writing within
90 days of receipt of the lease and supporting documentation,
including documentation related to value. In approving a nontrust
lease, the commission shall find that the lease meets all of the
following:
(A) Is for fair market value.
(B) Is consistent with the terms of the public trust and the
Burton Act trust, other than their restrictions on uses.
(C) Is otherwise in the best interest of the state.
(2) Whenever a nontrust lease is submitted to the commission for
its consideration, the costs of any study or investigation undertaken
by or at the request of the commission, including reasonable
reimbursement for time incurred by commission staff in processing,
investigating, and analyzing such submittal, shall be borne by the
port; however, the port may seek payment or reimbursement for these
costs from the proposed lessee.
SEC. 8. Section 4.5 is added to Chapter 660 of the Statutes of
2007, to read:
Sec. 4.5. (a) For nontrust leases of Seawall Lot 337, the
commission shall consider whether the port will receive consideration
equal to the fair market value based on, and in accordance with, all
of the following procedures:
(1) At least 30 days prior to approval by the board of supervisors
of the development project for Seawall Lot 337, the port shall
submit the proposed disposition and development agreement between the
master developer and the port governing the master development of
Seawall Lot 337 and the following information, to the extent not
contained in the agreement, to the commission for its consideration:
(A) The proposed procedures for the disposition of nontrust
development parcels and including the proposed plan of finance for
the development project that describes the proposed port advances for
Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure costs.
(B) The proposed procedures for establishing the fair market value
of each nontrust lease of a development parcel, including the
appraisal instructions.
(C) A description of the nontrust sources that the port expects to
receive for the project and how theses nontrust sources will be
applied to the project.
(D) A description of the manner by which the port will select the
developer of each development parcel, including the form of ground
lease, subject to minor modifications for each development parcel
lease permitted by the transaction documents.
(2) Following approval of the development project for Seawall Lot
337 by the board of supervisors, the port shall submit to the
commission the project documents described in paragraph (1) as
finally approved by the board of supervisors.
(3) Within 75 days after approval of the project by the board of
supervisors and receipt of all required documentation from the port,
the commission shall either approve or disapprove the procedures for
establishing the fair market value of the development parcels, the
form of ground lease, and the port's use of port advances to pay for
Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure costs. The commission may
shall request additional information or
documentation from the port. port, including
evidence of financial assurances acceptable to the commission that
the trust will be made whole. The commission shall not approve
the port's use of port advances for the duration of the project
unless the commission determines that such use of port advances as
described in the documentation submitted by the port is in the best
interests of the state, will benefit the public trust, and is on
terms and conditions consistent with the port's fiduciary duties as
trustee. The commission may only approve the port's use of port
advances if it finds that there are sufficient assurances that the
trust will be made whole. The commission may take into account
information required to be submitted pursuant to this section, the
benefits of the development to the state and to the public trust, the
substantial infrastructure investment required in
Seawall Lot 337 infrastructure, 337,
and the contribution of nontrust sources to Seawall Lot 337
infrastructure. infrastructure that the commission
determines benefits the trust.
(4) Following the commission's approval in accordance
withparagraph (3), and If the commission makes an
approval pursuant to paragraph (3), the port, prior to entering
into a nontrust lease for Seawall Lot 337, the port
shall submit to the executive officer of the commission a
copy of the proposed nontrust lease. The port may enter into the
nontrust lease unless, within 30 days after the submittal, the
executive officer has provided the port with a written determination
that the nontrust lease is inconsistent with the commission's
original approval.
(5) The port shall bear the costs of any study or investigation
that the commission undertakes or requests, including reasonable
reimbursement for commission staff time in processing, investigating,
and analyzing the port's submittal. The port's reimbursement
obligation does not affect its ability to seek payment or
reimbursement for these costs from the master developer.
(b) In addition to any statement of expenditures and revenues that
the port is required by law to submit to the commission annually,
the port shall provide a separate accounting of all of the following:
(1) All consideration from nontrust sources and other revenues the
port has received in connection with Seawall Lot 337.
(2) All other revenues that the port has spent on Seawall Lot 337,
including any port advances.
(3) Any revenues from nontrust sources received by the port to
repay port advances.
(c) The port shall provide the commission with copies of the final
audit report for each phase of the project and the final audit
report for the project within 90 days after the port receives each
audit report.
(d) The port shall periodically, and upon request of the
commission, submit to the commission a report detailing the issuance
and repayment of any port advances, or and
notify the commission where the reports, including staff
reports, may be accessed electronically. If, within 20 years after
the first port advance, the port has not submitted an audit report to
the commission indicating that all of the port advances have been
repaid, the port shall report to the commission the total amount of
revenues from nontrust leases that the port used to fund port
advances, the amount that the port has received to repay port
advances, the projected sources to repay any balance still owing on
account of port advances, and the expected timing of repayment of the
balance still owing. Thereafter, the port shall provide supplemental
reports containing updates to this information to the commission
every five years.
(e) The port shall ensure repayment, with interest, of each port
advance within 50 25 years after the
port advance is made. The port may extend the repayment period beyond
50 25 years subject to commission
approval. The commission shall base its approval, in part, on whether
the port is taking actions that ensure the trust is made whole,
consistent with its fiduciary duties as a trustee of the public
trust.
SEC. 9. Section 7 of Chapter 660 of the Statutes of 2007 is
amended to read:
Sec. 7. Upon the termination of the 75-year term
No later than 75 years from the initial occupancy date
for a designated seawall lot or
development parcel, parcel in Seawall Lot
337, and in no event later than December 31, 2105, the use of
the designated seawall lot or development parcel shall be
consistent with the public trust, the Burton Act trust, and the
Burton Act transfer agreement and all structures, buildings, and
appurtenances on the desigated seawall lot or development
parcel not consistent with the public trust, the Burton Act trust,
and Burton Act transfer agreement, shall be repurposed or
repurposed, modified, or removed,
including any necessary restoration or remediation of the seawall lot
to facilitate public trust uses. No subsequent nontrust
lease shall be granted for any development parcel.
SEC. 10. If any provision of this act, or its application to any
person, property, or circumstance, is held invalid by any court, the
invalidity or inapplicability of that provision shall not affect any
other provision of this act or the application of that provision to
any other person, property, or circumstance, and the remaining
portions of this act shall continue in full force and effect, unless
enforcement of this act as so modified by and in response to that
invalidation would be grossly inequitable under all of the
circumstances, or would frustrate the fundamental purposes of this
act.
SEC. 11. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that, because of
the unique circumstances applicable only to the lands described in
this act in the City and County of San Francisco, a statute of
general applicability cannot be enacted within the meaning of
subdivision (b) of Section 16 of Article IV of the California
Constitution.
(b) The Legislature also finds and declares that the exemption
under Section 4 of this act from the laws governing the dissolution
of former redevelopment agencies is necessary to address the unique
circumstances relating to the development of Parcel P20, including
the fact that the parcel was never owned by a former redevelopment
agency and the fact that the transfer and use of Parcel P20 for the
Mission Bay South redevelopment project will benefit the state by
generating revenues from the various nontrust leases of land within
the parcel.
