BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair 2015 - 2016 Regular ------------------------------------------------------------------ |Bill No: |AB 402 |Hearing | 6/24/15 | | | |Date: | | |----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------| |Author: |Dodd |Tax Levy: |No | |----------+---------------------------------+-----------+---------| |Version: |6/16/15 |Fiscal: |No | ------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Consultant|Favorini-Csorba | |: | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- LOCAL AGENCY SERVICES: CONTRACTS Establishes a pilot program to allow local agency formation commissions in Napa and San Bernardino counties to authorize extensions of service to areas outside of a local agency's sphere of influence to support existing or planned uses. Background and Existing Law The Planning and Zoning Law requires every county and city to adopt a general plan that sets out planned uses for all of the area covered by the plan. Cities' and counties' major land use decisions-including development permitting-must be consistent with their general plans. In this way, the general plan is a blueprint for future development. The general plan must cover all of the area within a city or county's boundaries and can include areas outside of the agency's boundaries that, in the judgment of local planners, relate to the planning effort. This can include planning development in areas that may become the future boundaries of the agency. Local agencies may also adopt specific plans that provide for the systematic implementation of a general plan in a particular area. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (Act) delegates the Legislature's power to control the boundaries of cities and special districts to local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs). Each county has a LAFCO, which AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 2 of ? is governed by a board of elected officials-including city council members and county supervisors-and at least one member of the public appointed by the other members. About half of LAFCO boards have representatives from special districts. Controlling boundaries means LAFCOs control the timing and location of development, because they determine the type of services that are available to support development-and those that aren't. The Legislature created LAFCOs to discourage urban sprawl, preserve open space and prime agricultural lands, encourage the orderly formation and development of local agencies, and to ensure the efficient provision of government services. LAFCOs must adopt written policies to further these goals. LAFCOs also implement these goals by determining a "sphere of influence" for each local agency in its county. A sphere of influence designates an agency's probable future physical boundary and service area. It is territory that a city or special district will annex in the future. It's also the area where the local government will build facilities and deliver services sometime in the future. Importantly, an agency's sphere must be contiguous with its current boundaries, and LAFCOs may recommend boundary changes based on spheres of influence. LAFCOs must consider these factors when determining spheres of influence: Present and planned land uses; Present and probable need for public facilities and services; Present and probable future capacity of public facilities and services; and Existence of any social or economic communities of interest, if relevant. Before a commission revises cities and special districts' spheres of influence, a municipal service review (MSR) must be prepared. In conducting an MSR, LAFCOs must review all of the agencies that provide the public services within the study area. LAFCOs must revise the spheres of influence every five years. LAFCOs must also revise the MSRs every five years - some time before revising a sphere of influence. The Act also requires cities and districts to get a LAFCO's written approval before they can serve territory outside their AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 3 of ? boundaries. This requirement was established because of a concern that some cities and districts might be circumventing LAFCO review by signing contracts to provide services outside their boundaries without annexing the territory. However, the Legislature recognized the need to accommodate unexpected local conditions and several exemptions were established. In 1999, the Legislature expanded these provisions to allow services outside spheres of influence to correct public health and safety problems, pointing to failing septic tanks and water wells to exemplify the necessity for the change. When a city or special district requests to extend services outside of its boundaries, the LAFCO must follow certain procedures and deadlines to determine whether the application is complete and then approve, disapprove, or conditionally approve the extension of service. Some local officials want to expand the range of circumstances under which they can extend services outside of their agencies' spheres of influence. Proposed Law AB 402 establishes a pilot program that allows the Napa and San Bernardino LAFCOs to authorize a city or special district to extend services outside its sphere of influence to support existing or planned uses, if that extension is consistent with the LAFCOs policies (such as those that encourage orderly development). The bill defines "planned use" to mean any project that is included in a local agency's specific plan. This pilot program sunsets on January 1, 2021. Under AB 402, in order to approve an extension of service to an area outside of a local agency's sphere of influence, the LAFCO must find that: A municipal service review has identified and evaluated a services deficiency or the proposed extension of services; The extension of service will not result in adverse impacts on open space or agricultural lands or have growth inducing impacts; and A later change of organization involving the subject territory and its affected agency is not feasible under this division or desirable based on the adopted policies of AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 4 of ? the commission. AB 402 requires the Commission, when reviewing a request to extend services outside of a local agency's sphere of influence, to follow the same process for ensuring completion of the application and deadlines as apply to other requests to extend services. AB 402 requires the Napa and San Bernardino LAFCOs to submit a report to the Legislature on their participation in the pilot program that includes the number of requests were received under the program and the actions that the LAFCOs took. AB 402 also makes technical changes to the existing code sections that govern extension of services. State Revenue Impact No estimate. Comments 1. Purpose of the bill . AB 402 provides LAFCOs with more flexibility to approve service extensions outside of a sphere of influence without requiring annexation of territories that might lead to unintended sprawl. Under current law, an agency's sphere must be extended to contiguous territory. Thus, if an agency wants to serve an area outside its sphere for purposes other than health and safety, its sphere must be extended all the way to that area. This can lead to illogical and inefficient development patterns if a city wants to serve an existing development. For example, Whetstone winery in Napa is an existing development that lies adjacent to a city water line and is outside of the city's sphere of influence in an unincorporated area surrounded by agricultural lands. When the property owner submitted the application for water service to be extended to this property to allow for a fire hydrant to be serviced, the extension was denied because this was not a residential property and the health and safety exemption in current law could not be applied. The only means to extend water to this property would be to annex it into the city's sphere of influence, potentially allowing future development in all of the territory between the city's current sphere and the AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 5 of ? winery. With a city water line running adjacent to the property, allowing Whetstone an exemption to access this city water rather than annexing the property into the city's sphere of influence would be a greater protection to the surrounding agricultural lands than extending the sphere of influence into the unincorporated area. 2. Sphere of impotence . AB 402 cuts two ways when it comes to the intent of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act to promote orderly development and efficient service delivery. While allowing extensions of service to existing uses might avoid some sprawl, the inclusion of planned uses in AB 402 undermines a key tool for LAFCOs-the sphere of influence. Since spheres of influence are supposed to take into account the planned uses within an area, extending service to an area outside an agency's sphere of influence means that at some previous point, the LAFCO should have considered and rejected an action to include that area in the local agency's sphere. Thus, allowing extensions of service to areas outside a sphere of influence for a planned use could render the established spheres meaningless. In addition, some local officials that sit on a LAFCO's board also control updates to the general and specific plans. This leaves open the potential for a planned use to be designated for a given area, which could then receive a service extension under AB 402. In this way, AB 402 might enable "leapfrog development" in remote areas that would not otherwise be supported. In order to protect the intent of the Act, the Committee may wish to consider amending AB 402 to remove "planned use" as a basis for extending service. 3. Let's get specific . AB 402 does not specify a date by which the report on the pilot program must be completed. The Committee may wish to consider amending AB 402 to require the report to be submitted by January 1, 2020 to allow the Legislature time to evaluate the effects of the pilot program before considering whether to extend or discontinue it. 4. Let's be clear . Two sections of AB 402 are unclear. The Committee may wish to consider the following amendments to clarify that: The extension of service will not result in either (1) adverse impacts on open space or agricultural lands, or (2) growth inducing impacts. As written, there is some ambiguity as to whether a LAFCO could find that an AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 6 of ? extension of service will not meet one of those conditions while remaining silent on the other. A sphere of influence change involving the territory is not feasible (instead of a later change of organization, as written). Because changes of organizations must follow a sphere of influence change, under AB 402 a change of organization would never be feasible when an agency requests to extend service outside of its sphere, making the finding redundant. 5. Special legislation . The California Constitution prohibits special legislation when a general law can apply (Article IV, §16). AB 402 contains findings and declarations stating that a general law cannot be made because of the unique circumstances in Napa County and San Bernardino County. 6. Related legislation . SB 1498 (Emmerson, 2012) would have given LAFCOs in counties statewide authority similar to the authority that AB 402 gives to Napa and San Bernardino counties. It also would have repealed a prohibition on annexations where a disadvantaged, unincorporated community is contiguous to the proposed annexation. SB 1498 was never heard in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. Earlier this year, the Senate Governance & Finance Committee voted 5-2 to approve SB 239 (Hertzberg, 2015), which would require a public agency to obtain a LAFCO's approval to provide new or extended services under a fire protection reorganization contract, pursuant to a specified approval process. Because AB 402 and SB 239 amend the same code sections in different ways, if both bills are signed into law the changes made by the bill that is chaptered first will get wiped out by the changes made by the bill that is chaptered last. To prevent one bill from "chaptering-out" the other, the Committee may wish to consider adopting technical "double-jointing" amendments that allow both bill's provisions to become law regardless of the order in which they are chaptered. 7. Technical amendment . The Committee may wish to consider a technical amendment to correct a cross-reference for the definition of "local publicly owned electric utility." The bill references Section 9604 of the Public Utilities Code, but Chapter 558, Statutes of 2008 amended the Public Utilities Code AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 7 of ? and moved the definition to Section 224.3. Assembly Actions Assembly Local Government Committee: 6-3 Assembly Floor: 54-23 AB 402 (Dodd) 6/16/15 Page 8 of ? Support and Opposition (6/18/15) Support : Napa County LAFCO; Napa County Board of Supervisors; San Bernardino LAFCO. Oppose Unless Amended: California Building Industry Association; California Farm Bureau Federation. Opposition : California Farm Bureau Federation; Napa County Farm Bureau; California Building Industry Association. -- END --