BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1961
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 2, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, Chair
AB 1961 (Eggman) - As Amended: March 25, 2014
SUBJECT : Land use: planning: sustainable farmland strategy
SUMMARY : Requires counties to develop a sustainable farmland
strategy. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the board of supervisors of any county, other than a
county with less than 4 percent of its land base in
agriculture, as specified, to develop a Sustainable Farmland
Strategy.
2)Requires the Sustainable Farmland Strategy to include all of
the following:
a) A map and inventory of all agriculturally zoned lands
within the county as of February 21, 2014. Allows a county
to use the county-level maps of agricultural land developed
by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
Department of Conservation, general plan maps, or other
available local and state maps and resources;
b) A description of the goals, strategies, and related
policies and ordinances to retain agriculturally zoned
land, where practical, and mitigate the loss of
agriculturally zoned lands to nonagricultural uses or
nonagricultural zones;
c) A page on the county's Internet Web site that assembles
all of the relevant documentation for the goals, strategies
and related policies, and ordinances, as specified in a)
and b), above, as well as reporting on the manner of
compliance, as specified. Requires the board of
supervisors to also include, on the Internet Web site, a
table and map showing the location of lands enrolled in the
California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act).
3)Requires the board of supervisors of each county to consult
with cities located within their boundaries, and with their
local agency formation commission (LAFCO), on the development
of the sustainable farmland strategy for that county to assure
AB 1961
Page 2
that the plans and policies of the cities and LAFCO are taken
into consideration and are compatible to the maximum extent
feasible.
4)Allows a county to comply with the requirements of this bill
by relying on existing inventories and maps of agricultural
lands, and existing goals, strategies, and related policies
and ordinances that substantially comply with the provisions
of 2), above. Requires any county complying in this manner to
summarize and incorporate by reference on the county's
Internet Web site, a description of how each requirement has
been met.
5)Requires the board of supervisors to update the Sustainable
Farmland Strategy as determined to be necessary by the board.
6)Requires, on or before January 1, 2018, each county to affirm
compliance by one of the following means:
a) Developing and adopting a Sustainable Farmland Strategy
consistent with 2), above;
b) Adopting a resolution finding that the existing county
goals, policies and ordinances have a functionally
equivalent strategy that meets the requirements of 2),
above, pursuant to 4), above; or,
c) Adopting a resolution finding that the county's
agricultural land resources do not meet the threshold and
therefore the county is not required to develop a
sustainable farmland strategy.
7)Requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR),
when it adopts its next edition of general plan guidelines, to
include best practices that support agricultural land
retention and mitigation, including, but not limited to, the
following:
a) Right to farm ordinance with real estate disclosure;
b) Farmland mitigation ordinances;
c) Conservation easement purchase programs;
d) Economic incentives to promote local agriculture;
AB 1961
Page 3
e) Use of zoning to prevent nuisances and land use
conflicts, and to promote commercial agriculture by
limiting parcelization of agricultural lands;
f) Urban growth boundaries in coordination with
incorporated jurisdictions; and,
g) Locally adopted thresholds of significance for
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for
conservation of grazing lands and farmland of local
importance, in addition to existing thresholds for
conversion of prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland
of statewide importance.
8)Requires OPR to include in their next update of the General
Plan Guidelines recommendations on the role of LAFCOs in the
preservation of agriculturally zoned lands when considering
annexations of agriculturally zoned lands into cities and
service extensions onto agriculturally zoned lands.
9)Adds to the list of factors to be considered by a LAFCO in the
review of a proposal for a change or organization or
reorganization a sustainable farmland strategy, if one has
been developed pursuant to the provisions of the bill.
10)Defines "agriculturally zoned land" to mean land that is
determined by a county to be designated in agriculture as the
primary purpose of use of the zone.
11)Makes a number of findings and declarations related to the
importance of conservation of agricultural land resources.
12)Declares the certain actions by local agencies, including
those to protect natural resources and the environment, have
been identified by OPR as classes of projects that do not have
a significant effect on the environment, and are therefore not
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, and
declares that the adoption of a sustainable farmland strategy
would be considered to be an action to protect natural
resources or the environment.
13)Provides that no reimbursement is required by the bill's
provisions because a local agency or school district has the
authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments
AB 1961
Page 4
sufficient to pay for the program or level of service.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires that each city and county in California must prepare
a comprehensive, long term general plan to guide its future.
2)Requires a general plan to include seven mandatory elements,
including a land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open
space, noise, and safety.
3)Allows the general plan to include other elements or address
any other subjects which, in the judgment of the legislative
body, relate to the physical development of the county or
city.
4)Requires OPR to adopt and periodically revise guidelines for
the preparation and content of local general plans.
5)Establishes the procedures for the organization and
reorganization of cities, counties, and special districts
under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Reorganization Act of
2000.
6)Establishes, in each county, a LAFCO and declares the purposes
of LAFCOs are to discourage urban sprawl, preserve open-space
and prime agricultural lands, efficiently provide government
services, and encourage the orderly formation and development
of local agencies based upon local conditions and
circumstances.
7)Lists and specifies 15 factors that a LAFCO must consider in
the review of a proposal for a change of organization or
reorganization, including the following (for full list see
Government Code Section 56668):
a) A regional transportation plan adopted pursuant to
Section 65080;
b) The sphere of influence of any local agency which may be
applicable to the proposal being reviewed;
c) The extent to which the proposal will affect a city or
cities and the county in achieving their respective fair
shares of the regional housing needs as determined by the
AB 1961
Page 5
appropriate council of governments; and,
d) Any information relating to existing land use
designations.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of this bill . This bill requires most counties, by
January 1, 2018, to develop a Sustainable Farmland Strategy to
include maps of agriculturally-zoned lands and local goals,
policies, and ordinances for the retention and mitigation of
agriculturally-zoned lands. The bill allows a county to
comply by using existing inventories and maps, existing goals,
strategies and policies that the county has already adopted.
The bill also requires OPR to include, in its next update of
the General Plan Guidelines, best practices that support
farmland conservation, and additionally requires a LAFCO, when
considering a proposal for a change organization or
reorganization, to consider a sustainable farmland strategy
developed by a county, in addition to other factors already
required in existing law.
This bill is co-sponsored by American Farmland Trust,
California Climate and Agriculture Network, and Community
Alliance with Family Farmers.
2)Author's statement . According to the author, "California is
the nation's leader in food production and contributes
significantly to our food security and our economy.
California agriculture is also positioned to provide climate
benefits by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Research
funded by the California Energy Commission's Public Interest
Research (PIER) program found that an acre of urban land emits
70 times more greenhouse gas emission than an acre of
irrigated cropland. Over the past 30 years, an average of
approximately 30,000 acres of California agricultural land was
permanently converted to non-agricultural uses annually."
"Counties have jurisdiction over the majority of the state's
agricultural land and play a vital role in regulating the use
of land, including the development and conservations of
AB 1961
Page 6
agricultural lands through appropriate zoning and planning
activities, as well as determinations of the potential
environmental impacts of proposed land use changes."
3)City and county general plans and OPR's general plan
guidelines . Existing law requires that each city and county
in California prepare a comprehensive, long term general plan
to guide its future. General plans include seven mandatory
elements, including housing, conservation, circulation, open
space, noise, safety and land use. A city or county may also
include optional elements in a general plan - and there are
several counties in California that have adopted an optional
"ag element" as part of their general plan in order to deal
with special concerns and interests of the agricultural
community.
To that end, OPR provides advice to local governments and the
public on application of the state's general plan law and
periodically revises and publishes the general plan
guidelines. OPR, since the start of this year, has been
working on the update of the next general plan guidelines.
This bill requires counties, outside of the general plan, to
develop a sustainable farmland strategy. Additionally, the
bill requires OPR, upon its next update of the general plan
guidelines, to include best practices that support
agricultural land retention and mitigation.
4)Role of LAFCOs . Existing law establishes a LAFCO in each
county and declares the purposes of LAFCOs are to discourage
urban sprawl, preserve open-space and prime agricultural
lands, efficiently provide government services, and encourage
the orderly formation and development of local agencies based
upon local conditions and circumstances.
This bill contains several references to LAFCOs. First, the
bill requires the board of supervisors of each county to
consult with the cities located in their boundaries, and with
their LAFCO, on the development of the sustainable farmland
strategy. Second, the bill requires OPR to include in their
next update of the General Plan Guidelines recommendations on
the roles of LAFCOs in the preservation of agriculturally
zoned lands when considering annexations of agriculturally
zoned lands into cities and service extensions onto
agricultural zoned lands. Third, the bill adds a sustainable
AB 1961
Page 7
farmland strategy to the list of factors to be considered by a
LAFCO in the review of a proposal for a change or organization
or reorganization.
LAFCOs currently have a list of 15 specified factors that the
must consider when they are making boundary decisions. This
section of LAFCO law was most recently updated by SB 215
(Wiggins), Chapter 570, Statutes of 2009. SB 215 added a
"regional transportation plan adopted pursuant to Government
Code 65080." The goal of SB 215 was to bring the specified
factors that LAFCO considers in line with provisions of SB 375
(Steinberg).
This bill builds upon the provisions of SB 215 to require
LAFCOs to additionally consider a sustainable farmland
strategy, if one has been adopted by the county, prior to the
LAFCO making a decision about boundary changes.
5)Policy considerations . A number of concerns have been raised
by interested parties, including the following:
a) Sustainable farmland strategy outside of the General
Plan . The Committee may wish to ask the author to explain
whether this new duty for counties to develop a sustainable
farmland strategy might be better handled in the relevant
elements of a county's general plan or in an optional ag
element, especially in light of the bill's requirement for
OPR to include new information in its General Plan
Guidelines related to ag land retention and provide best
practices to be used by cities in counties in their general
plans.
b) New duties for OPR . The Committee may wish to ask the
author to discuss why OPR, and why the General Plan
Guidelines specifically, are the appropriate mechanism to
discuss the role of LAFCOs in the preservation of
agriculturally zoned lands. LAFCOs are guided by the
statutes contained in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act, not
by the General Plan Guidelines.
c) Mandate disclaimer . This bill contains a problematic
mandate disclaimer. In Section 5, the bill provides that
"no reimbursement is required by this act?because a local
agency or school district has the authority to levy service
charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the
AB 1961
Page 8
program or level of service mandated by this act."
This bill creates an additional duty for most counties to
develop a Sustainable Farmland Strategy. However, there is
no project applicant for a county to charge a fee to, as
there would be in other instances where a developer, for
instance, is charged a fee by the local agency that is
levied on a new development to cover the cost of
infrastructure or facilities necessitated by that
development.
The Committee may wish to consider whether the new duties
in this bill constitute an unfunded mandate and ask the
author to explain who the counties are going to levy fees
on to cover their costs.
6)Arguments in support . Supporters argue that counties have
jurisdiction over the majority of the state's agricultural
land and play a vital role in regulating the use of the land,
including the development and conservation of agricultural
lands, and that this bill creates the opportunity at the
county level to discuss and plan for the future of our
agricultural lands. Additionally, supporters note that the
Sustainable Farmland Strategy Act respects the local control
of land use planning decisions, while creating the opportunity
for a statewide discussion of the importance of agricultural
lands.
7)Arguments in opposition . A coalition including the California
Building Industry Association, California Business Properties
Association, California Chamber of Commerce, California
Apartment Association, Orange County Business Council, Large
Scale Solar Association, California Association of Realtors,
and the American Council of Engineering Companies writes that
the bill "invites the restrictive zoning to be applied to
significantly lesser quality lands that are not critical to
the maintenance of the agricultural economy and are not
necessary to the protection of the state's food supply or
necessary for food security." Also, the bill "contains a
statement buried in the finds and declares section [of the
bill] stating that the [sustainable farmland strategy] is an
act to protect natural resources and the environment and
therefore is exempt from CEQA" and that this is a "clear
usurpation of the role and responsibility traditionally left
to the local lead agency to determine whether or not an action
AB 1961
Page 9
qualifies for an exemption."
8)Double-referral . This bill is double-referred to the
Agriculture Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Farmland Trust [CO-SPONSOR]
California Climate and Agricultural Network [CO-SPONSOR]
Community Alliance with Family Farmers [CO-SPONSOR]
Agricultural-Natural Resources Trust
California Association of Resource Conservation Districts
California Center for Rural Policy, Humboldt State University
California Farm Bureau Federation
Catholic Charities, Diocese of Stockton
Farmland Working Group
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Knoll Farms
LandWatch Monterey County
Marin Agricultural Land Trust
Peninsula Open Space Trust
Potrero Nuevo Farm
AB 1961
Page 10
Rincon-Vitova Insectaries
Rominger Brothers Farms, Inc.
San Mateo County Farm Bureau
Sequoia Riverlands Trust
Sierra Nevada Alliance
Silicon Valley Land Conservancy
Supervisor Louis R. Calcagno, 2nd District, County of Monterey
Supervisor Don Horsley, 3rd District, County of San Mateo
Sierra Orchards
Sonoma Land Trust
The Land Trust of Santa Cruz County
The Nature Conservancy
Trust for Public Land
Valley Land Alliance
Opposition
American Council of Engineering Companies of California
California Association of Realtors
California Apartment Association
California Building Industry Association
California Business Properties Association
California Chamber of Commerce
Counties of Humboldt and Kern
Large Scale Solar Association
League of California Cities (unless amended)
Orange County Business Council
Analysis Prepared by : Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958