BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 1191|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                   THIRD READING 


          Bill No:  AB 1191
          Author:   Nazarian (D)
          Amended:  6/24/15 in Senate
          Vote:     21  

           SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE:  7-0, 7/1/15
           AYES:  Hertzberg, Nguyen, Beall, Hernandez, Lara, Moorlach,  
            Pavley

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  74-0, 5/22/15 - See last page for vote

           SUBJECT:   Quimby Act:  fees


          SOURCE:    Author

          DIGEST:   This bill allows the City of Los Angeles to spend  
          proceeds from accrued interest on fee revenues collected  
          pursuant to the Quimby Act for specified purposes.

          ANALYSIS:
               
          Existing law:

          1)Sets out four criteria, pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (AB  
            1600, Cortese, 1987), that local officials must meet when  
            charging developer impact fees:

             a)   Identify the fee's purpose.

             b)   Identify the fee's use.

             c)   Determine a reasonable relationship between the use of  








                                                                    AB 1191  
                                                                    Page  2


               the fee and the type of development project.

             d)   Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for  
               public facilities and the type of development project.

          2)Controls, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, how counties  
            and cities review and approve property owners' requests to  
            convert larger parcels into smaller lots.  Local officials  
            commonly attach scores of conditions when they approve  
            tentative subdivision maps.  Mainstream legal thinking holds  
            that counties and cities have three sources of authority to  
            impose conditions on proposed subdivisions:

             a)   Conditions to make the subdivision consistent with the  
               local general plan.

             b)   Conditions to mitigate a subdivision's environmental  
               impacts.

             c)   Conditions that the Map Act specifically authorizes.

          3)Allows, pursuant to the Quimby Act, counties and cities to  
            require subdividers to dedicate land, or pay in-lieu fees for  
            parks as a condition of approving a new subdivision.  

          4)Requires that, to impose Quimby Act fees, a county or city  
            must have a general plan or a specific plan that contains  
            policies and standards for park facilities.  Quimby Act fees  
            must "bear a reasonable relationship" to the proposed  
            subdivision.  Counties and cities can use the Quimby Act fees  
            only for developing new parks or rehabilitating parks that  
            serve that subdivision.  

          5)Allows, as an exemption, a county or city to use Quimby Act  
            fees to be used for the purpose of developing new or  
            rehabilitating existing park, or recreational facilities in a  
            neighborhood other than the neighborhood in which the  
            subdivision for which fees were paid if specified requirements  
            are met (AB 1359, Hernández, Chapter 412, Statutes of 2013).

          6)Requires that fees collected by local governments pursuant to  
            the Quimby Act must be committed within five years after the  
            payment of the fees, or the issuance of building permits on  
            one-half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever  







                                                                    AB 1191 
                                                                    Page  3


            occurs later.  If the fees are not committed, they, without  
            any deductions, must be distributed and paid to the then  
            record owners of the subdivision in the same proportion that  
            the size of their lot bears to the total area of all lots  
            within the subdivision.

          This bill:

          1)Allows a city with a population of at least three million to  
            commit interest accrued on or before January 1, 2016, on fees  
            charged pursuant to the Quimby Act, without regard to the date  
            the fee was collected or the date of issuance of building  
            permits on one-half of the lots created by the subdivision,  
            outside the subdivision for which the fees were collected if  
            the city:

             a)   Holds a public hearing before committing the interest,  
               and

             b)   Uses the interest to develop new, or rehabilitate  
               existing, neighborhood or community parks or recreational  
               facilities within the city.

          2)Directs that the authority for a city to commit interest on  
            Quimby Act fees subject to the conditions described above will  
            remain in effect only until January 1, 2021, on which date  
            that authority will be automatically repealed.

          3)Specifies that, with regard to the expenditure of Quimby Act  
            fees, the term "fee" includes any interest income generated  
            from a fee charged and collected pursuant to the Quimby Act.

          4)States that its provisions do not constitute a change in, but  
            are declaratory of, existing law and that any locally adopted  
            ordinance or regulation that is consistent with this bill's  
            provisions is valid.

          Background
          
          For many years, the City of Los Angeles accounted for interest  
          income generated by Quimby Act fees in a manner that now  
          prevents the City from connecting specific amounts of interest  
          income with fees paid for any particular subdivision at any  
          particular time.  Because the language in the Quimby Act does  







                                                                    AB 1191  
                                                                    Page  4


          not specifically address the use of interest income generated  
          from fees, city officials worry that their authority to spend  
          that interest income for park projects is, at best, ambiguous.   
          They want the Legislature to clarify the statutory authority to  
          spend interest income from Quimby Act fees and allow the City of  
          Los Angeles to spend interest proceeds accrued until January 1,  
          2016, for specified park projects.


          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          SUPPORT:   (Verified7/2/15)


          City of Los Angeles


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified7/2/15)


          None received


           
           

          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  74-0, 5/22/15
          AYES:  Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla,  
            Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau,  
            Chávez, Chiu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd,  
            Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia,  
            Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,  
            Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones,  
            Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,  
            Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,  
            Nazarian, Obernolte, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,  
            Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark  
            Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Alejo, Chu, O'Donnell, Olsen, Waldron, Weber

          Prepared by:Brian Weinberger / GOV. & F. / (916) 651-4119
          7/2/15 11:39:13







                                                                    AB 1191  
                                                                    Page  5




                                   ****  END  ****