BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 402|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 402
Author: Dodd (D)
Amended: 6/30/15 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/24/15
AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach, Pavley
NO VOTE RECORDED: Nguyen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 54-23, 5/28/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Local agency services: contracts
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill establishes a pilot program to allow local
agency formation commissions (LAFCOs) 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, as defined.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Establishes the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of 2000, which defines the procedures for
the organization and reorganization of cities, counties, and
AB 402
Page 2
special districts.
2)Authorizes a city or district to provide new or extended
services by contract or agreement outside its jurisdictional
boundaries, if it requests and receives written approval from
the LAFCO in the affected county.
3)Allows a LAFCO to authorize a city or district to provide new
or extended services outside its boundaries, but within its
sphere of influence in anticipation of a later change of
organization.
4)Allows a LAFCO to authorize a city or district to provide new
or extended services outside its boundaries and outside its
sphere of influence to respond to an existing or impending
threat to the public health or safety of the residents of the
affected territory, if both of the following requirements are
met:
a) The entity applying for the contract has provided LAFCO
with documentation of a threat to the health and safety of
the public or the affected residents; and,
b) The LAFCO has notified any alternate service providers,
including any water corporation or sewer system corporation
that has filed a map and statement of service capabilities
with the LAFCO.
5)Establishes requirements and a timeframe for an executive
officer, upon receipt of a request for approval by a city or
district of a contract to extend services outside boundaries.
Requires, upon receipt of a complete request, the request to
be placed on the agenda or a LAFCO meeting, unless the LAFCO
has delegated the approval of requests to the executive
commissioner.
6)Requires the LAFCO or executive officer to approve,
disapprove, or approve with conditions the contract for
AB 402
Page 3
extended services. Allows an applicant, if a contract is
disapproved or approved with conditions, to request
reconsideration and cite the reasons why.
7)Provides exemptions to the requirement in existing law for
specified contracts or agreements, including contracts or
agreements solely involving two or more public agencies,
contracts for the transfer of nonpotable or nontreated water,
and contracts or agreements solely involving the provision of
surplus water to agricultural lands and facilities.
This bill:
1)Allows the Napa and San Bernardino LAFCOs, until January 1,
2021, to authorize a city or district to provide new or
extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries and
outside its sphere of influence, if consistent with adopted
policy, to support existing or planned uses involving public
or private properties, subject to approval at a noticed public
hearing where LAFCO makes all of the following determinations:
a) The extension of service or services deficiency was
identified and evaluated in a review of municipal services
(MSR) prepared, pursuant to existing law;
b) The extension of service will not result in either (1)
adverse impacts on open space or agricultural lands, or (2)
growth inducing impacts; and,
c) A later sphere of influence change involving the subject
territory and its affected agency is not feasible under
existing law or desirable based on the adopted policies of
LAFCO.
2)Defines planned use to mean any project that is included in an
approved specific plan as of July 1, 2015.
3)Requires the Napa and San Bernardino LAFCOs to submit a
AB 402
Page 4
report, by January 1, 2020 to the Legislature on their
participation in the pilot program, including how many
requests for extension of services were received pursuant to
the authority granted by this bill, and the action by the
LAFCO to approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions the
extension of services.
4)Declares that a special law is necessary and that a general
law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of the
California Constitution because of the unique circumstances in
Napa and San Bernardino.
5)Makes other technical and conforming changes.
Background:
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 LAFCOs. Each
county has a LAFCO, which 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
AB 402
Page 5
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.
The Act also requires cities and districts to get a LAFCO's
written approval before they can serve territory outside their
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.
Comments:
Purpose of the bill. AB 402 provides LAFCOs with more
AB 402
Page 6
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
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.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified7/1/15)
Napa County Board of Supervisors
Napa County Local Agency Formation Commission
San Bernardino Local Agency Formation Commission
OPPOSITION: (Verified7/1/15)
AB 402
Page 7
California Building Industries Association
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 54-23, 5/28/15
AYES: Alejo, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos,
Chang, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd,
Eggman, Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia,
Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gray, Roger Hernández, Holden,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mayes, McCarty,
Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Perea, Quirk,
Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth,
Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chávez,
Dahle, Beth Gaines, Gatto, Hadley, Harper, Irwin, Jones, Kim,
Lackey, Linder, Mathis, Melendez, Olsen, Patterson, Wagner,
Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bloom, Gordon, Grove
Prepared by:Anton Favorini-Csorba / GOV. & F. / (916) 651-4119
7/1/15 16:21:19
**** END ****