EZ Policy Blog

Someone turned on the memo spigot at HCD.  Today HCD issued Memorandum 8-07 dealing with some ambiguity in determining the correct effective dates of the LAMBRAs. As the memo describes the problem:

AB 2875 changed the effective date of each LAMBRA’s eight-year period. Because AB 2875 stated that a LAMBRA would begin its eight-year period after it fulfilled the later of two conditions, the legislation in effect changed the designation period stated or implied in the MOUs executed by the State Agency and signed by the LAMBRAs. This change occurred because most, if not all, of the LAMBRAs in 2002 had not met the later of the two conditions. Therefore, according to AB 2875, their eight-year period had not begun.

The conditions set forth in AB 2875 indicated that the State had to modify the terms of the original MOUs. However, based on our research, it appears that the State did not fully or accurately implement these modifications. For example, we found only two instances in which the State executed new memoranda of understanding. In both instances, the State concluded that the LAMBRAs had met the later of the two conditions specified in AB 2875 and, therefore, had begun their eight-year designation period. Upon further review, we found that at least one of these LAMBRAs had not transferred its economic development parcels as required by one of the conditions and, therefore, should not have started its designation period.