As reported in SHOOT last month, Gov. Gray Davis’ proposed budget for California’s 2002-’03 fiscal year contained some welcome news for the ad industry. Despite a state budget deficit estimated to exceed $12 billion, Gov. Davis apportioned $10 million to fund an additional year of Film California First (FCF), an anti-runaway production program that’s received favorable reviews from its users in the spotmaking community.
FCF provides reimbursements of certain film-related costs incurred by qualified production companies when lensing on local, state or federal public property in California. Eligible projects include commercials, TV programs and theatrical features.
While Gov. Davis’ proposed budget for the next fiscal year has to make its way through the state legislature—and much wrangling is expected on both sides of the political aisle—the FCF appropriation appears likely to be part of the final fiscal year package. FCF has generated bipartisan support as legislators have become increasingly aware of the runaway production problem.
"At a time when there is a budget deficit, a commitment has been made to maintain and expand this [FCF] program, and we’re very pleased," said Steve Caplan, senior VP, external affairs of the Association of Independent Commercial Producers (AICP). "This sends an significant message to the community about how important filming is to California … And a growing number of commercial production companies have tapped into and are using the [FCF] program."
The $10 million appropriation matches the amount in the current fiscal year budget for FCF. But the expansion alluded to by Caplan entails changes in the FCF guidelines, which go into effect immediately.
For example, FCF now allows reimbursements for multiple film shoots by the same production company on the same day. This expands the single per day/per public agency reimbursement, benefiting companies that shoot at two or more locations daily—as is common in commercials—and/or that have first- and second-unit lensing going on during a single day.
However, California filming incentives are not confined to FCF. Also receiving positive industry feedback has been the State Theatrical Arts Resources (STAR) program. The STAR system makes designated state-owned and -controlled surplus property and unused real estate assets available to producers for no or a low contract fee.
Furthermore, Gov. Davis has floated an initiative that, if passed, would offer a wage tax credit to qualified productions that lens primarily in California, effective in ’04. Whether that proposal becomes reality—and ends up applying to commercials—is yet to be determined (SHOOT, 1/18, p. 1).
But the effect of that initiative—and of the FCF and STAR programs—has already been felt beyond California, underscoring the need for anti-runaway reform throughout the U.S. For example, when FCF was passed into law in ’00, Dawn Keezer, chair of Film U.S., an industry group of 196 state and local film commissioners, characterized the California initiative as "a wonderful development." Keezer, who serves as director of the Pittsburgh Film Office, said, "California is seen as the leader. It’s where the bulk of production traditionally takes place. … It [FCF] is a signal to the rest of the U.S. and the federal government as well. This can only help us and perhaps at least spur more states to help themselves."
Since then—and as reflected in SHOOT’s "Made In America" Special Report last week—many states have enacted or are at least developing new anti-runaway incentives. While the passage of federal legislation is generally considered a long shot, action on state and local levels could prove to be the most viable means to address the profoundly adverse impact of runaway filming.
