BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1156 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 1156 (V. Manuel Pérez) As Amended June 27, 2013 Majority vote ----------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |66-8 |(May 30, 2013) |SENATE: |37-0 |(August 19, | | | | | | |2013) | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: L. GOV. SUMMARY : Makes changes to the weighted vote of a landowner in the Palo Verde Irrigation District (PVID). The Senate amendments : 1)Entitle a property owner that owns less than one acre of land to cast one vote. 2)Provide that no reimbursement will be made because the local agency is requesting the authority established by this bill. EXISTING LAW establishes the Palo Verde Irrigation District Act, and specifically: 1)Authorizes any person, firm, or corporation owning any real property and improvements, or any interest in real property and any improvements, to vote in any election pertaining to the affairs of the district. 2)Provides one vote for each $100 of assessed valuation or fraction greater than $50 for each qualified property owner. Determines the total number of votes any voter is entitled to cast by dividing the total assessed value of all parcels owned by the voter by 100. 3)Requires the assessed valuation to be the equalized assessment roll of the district preceding the election. AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill: 1)Deleted provisions in current law, which use the assessed value of land and improvements to calculate a landowner's weighted vote in the PVID and, instead, entitled each property AB 1156 Page 2 owner to one vote for every one acre owned. 2)Entitled a property owner that owns less than one acre of land, but at least one half of an acre, to cast one vote. 3)Required PVID to hold a public hearing about the changes to the weighted vote system. 4)Required PVID to provide public notice by placing an advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation, and by first-class mail to each landowner voter in the district, as specified. 5)Provided that if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to current law governing state mandated local costs. 6)Made findings and declarations. 7)Made other non-substantive and technical changes. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs. COMMENTS : PVID was established in 1923 and is comprised of mostly farmland occupying about 189 square miles of territory in Riverside and Imperial Counties. PVID contains approximately 131,298 acres and manages and delivers water to land within its jurisdiction. PVID is governed by a seven-member board of trustees elected at large among owners of property within the district. Current law limits voting rights in PVID to landowners and establishes a weighted vote system based on the assessed value of real property, including improvements made by landowners. The weighted vote system provides one vote for each $100 of assessed property, including improvements and divides the total assessed value by 100 to determine the number of votes for each landowner. This bill deletes the current weighted vote system in PVID and instead provides one vote per acre of land owned for each landowner. If a property owner owns less than one acre of land, this bill provides that property owner with one vote. Under this bill, the number of acres owned determines each landowner's AB 1156 Page 3 weighted vote. This bill requires PVID to hold a public hearing about the changes to the weighted vote system. Prior to the public hearing, PVID would also have to provide specified public notification by placing an advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation and by first-class mail to each landowner voter. This bill is sponsored by PVID. According to the sponsor, "Given the size and the abundance of sunshine in the geographic location of the PVID, it has been identified as a preferred location for solar development. The PVID was identified in the 2011 programmatic environmental impact statement of the United States Department of Energy and the (United State Department of the) Interior identified the region as an area available for solar development." According to the Association of California Water Agencies, in support, "This bill would ensure that the votes of irrigated landowners would not be diluted by any potential large solar projects in the district's service area." According to the author and sponsor, none of these projects have been developed in PVID yet. The California Constitution provides that the right to vote or serve in elected office may not be conditioned on a landownership qualification. However, in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Salyer Land Co. v. Tulare Water District that the California statute requiring a landownership qualification did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court ruled there was no violation because those districts do not exercise normal governmental authority and their activities disproportionally affect landowners. The California Supreme Court, in Choudhry v. Free (1976) 17 Cal. 3d 660, declared unconstitutional a section of the Irrigation District Law requiring potential board candidates to be landowners. The court ruled that this section was unconstitutional as applied to the Imperial Irrigation District and its board of directors, the real parties in interest, because it deprived the irrigation candidates and voters, including petitioner voters, of equal protection. The court's opinion gave two reasons it did not extend its ruling to other irrigation districts. First, the Imperial Irrigation District was singular at that time among irrigation districts in that it had more residents, land, and employees than any other irrigation district and it was providing retail water service. AB 1156 Page 4 Second, neither respondents nor real parties in interest had opposed petitioners' claim that Water Code Section 21100 was unconstitutional, and numerous irrigation districts in the state that would have been affected by a finding of unconstitutionality did not have the opportunity to present their views or offer evidence regarding the characteristics and operation of irrigation districts in general. California's 93 irrigation districts function under a range of statutes that are a hybrid of registered voter and landowner-voter type districts. In general, registered voters are eligible to vote in district elections, but board members must be landowners of the district. Historically, the Legislature has recognized landowners' special concerns for irrigation districts' operations by creating unique separate statutes that preserve the landowner requirement to vote in districts that primarily deliver agricultural water. Some of these districts have landownership, but not residency requirements. Some districts, including PVID, Camp Far West Montague, and Cordua Irrigation Districts, use weighted votes in their elections based on the relative value of land under ownership. SB 614 (Wolk) of 2013, pending in the Assembly, would delete the landowner qualification in statute for most irrigation district board members, but does not address the districts that have unique statutes. SB 614 builds upon several legislative attempts that have sought to limit landowner qualifications for board directors. In 2000, the Legislature deleted the landowner qualification for board members of irrigation districts that provide electricity (SB 1939 (Alarcón), Chapter 1041, Statutes of 2000). In 2006, the Legislature removed the landowner requirement for irrigation districts that provide 3,000 or more acre-feet of water to residential customers or that have more than 3,000 customers (AB 159 (Salinas), Chapter 847, Statutes of 2006). Support arguments: Supporters argue that this bill will ensure that voting power is equally distributed amongst all land owners, and will not favor only those who have preferred sites for solar energy development. Opposition arguments: None. AB 1156 Page 5 Analysis Prepared by : Misa Yokoi-Shelton / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0001503