BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE
Senator Dave Cox, Chair
BILL NO: AB 133 HEARING: 6/9/10
AUTHOR: Smyth FISCAL: No
VERSION: 5/20/10 CONSULTANT: Detwiler
SUBDIVISION FEES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Background and Existing Law
As a condition of approving subdivisions under the
Subdivision Map Act, cities and counties can impose fees to
pay for the costs of public works projects that are related
to those subdivisions. Local officials can also impose
subdivision fees to pay for new bridges and major
thoroughfares, but they must put the revenues into a fund
for each bridge or major thoroughfare project. Local
officials can spend the fee revenues only for construction
or to reimburse construction costs.
San Diego County has special statutory permission to spend
its bridge and major thoroughfare fees on the costs of
design, right-of-way acquisition, and actual construction
which includes direct and indirect environmental,
engineering, accounting, legal, and contract administration
costs. San Diego County can also pay for "reasonable
administrative expenses," up to $300,000 a year, adjusted
for changes in the consumer price index. Administrative
expenses include office, personnel, and other management
expenses (AB 4351, Cortese, 1987).
Los Angeles County has six bridge and thoroughfare
districts that receive subdivision fees, but the County
spends some of its countywide gas tax revenues to pay for
the related administrative, accounting, and legal costs.
Instead of diverting countywide revenues to pay for bridge
and thoroughfare costs that benefit specific areas, the
County wants to use some of its subdivision fees. The City
of Santa Clarita (Los Angeles County) also wants similar
permission.
Proposed Law
Assembly Bill 133 allows city officials in certain
situations and Los Angeles County officials to spend bridge
AB 133 -- 5/20/10 -- Page 2
and major thoroughfare subdivision fees on construction
costs that include design, acquisition of rights-of-way,
contract administration, and actual construction. AB 133
caps spending on "reasonable administrative expenses" at
$300,000 a year, adjusted after 1986, for changes in the
consumer price index.
The bill applies to construction:
In the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.
Where the area of benefit and all of the
improvements lie within both a city in Los Angeles
County and the County's unincorporated area.
Where all of the area of benefit and all of the
improvements lie completely within a city in Los
Angeles County.
Comment
Costs and benefits . AB 133 adds Los Angeles County and the
City of Santa Clarita to the existing law that lets San
Diego County pay for some its administrative costs with
bridge and major thoroughfare fees. By segregating those
costs to the projects that benefit from administrative
spending, AB 133 shifts some of the cost burden away from
countywide and citywide gas tax revenues. The carefully
written language applies to Santa Clarita, but not to the
City of Calabasas, which wanted to be left out of the bill.
Assembly Actions
Assembly Local Government Committee: 5-0
Assembly Floor: 71-0
Support and Opposition (6/3/10)
Support : County of Los Angeles, City of Santa Clarita.
Opposition : Unknown.