BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1582|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1582
Author: Assembly Local Government Committee
Amended: 6/10/09 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/17/09
AYES: Wiggins, Cox, Aanestad, Kehoe, Wolk
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 5/21/09 (Consent) - See last page
for vote
SUBJECT : Local agencies: spheres of influence
SOURCE : California Association of Local Agency
Formation
Commissions
DIGEST : This bill makes six changes to the state laws
affecting local agency formation commissions and local
governments boundaries.
ANALYSIS : The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act delegates the Legislature's power to
control the boundaries of cities and special districts to
local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs). The courts
call LAFCOs the Legislature's watchdog over local boundary
changes.
As practitioners find problems with the
Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act, they ask for statutory
CONTINUED
AB 1582
Page
2
improvements. The Assembly Local Government Committee
responds by authoring cleanup bills. Last year's LAFCO
cleanup bill was AB 3047 (Assembly Local Government
Committee), Chapter 68, Statutes of 2008.
This bill makes six changes to the state laws affecting
LAFCOs and local governments' boundaries:
1. Sphere of influence deadline for districts . LAFCOs must
adopt spheres of influence for all cities and special
districts. A sphere of influence is a plan for the city
or special district's probable future boundaries and
service area. When a LAFCO approves a city
incorporation proposal, the commission may determine the
proposed new city's sphere at the same time. A LAFCO
must determine a new city's sphere within one year after
incorporation (Section 56426.5 of the Government Code,
added by SB 1057 (Davis), Chapter 1384, Statutes of
1989). The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act is silent on
LAFCO's deadline for determining the sphere of influence
of a proposed new special district. This bill allows a
LAFCO to determine a proposed new special district's
sphere of influence at the same time the commission
approves the formation. A LAFCO must determine a new
special district's sphere within one year after the
district's formation.
2. Spheres of influence and Williamson Act land . The
Williamson Act allows landowners to sign voluntary
contracts that enforceably restrict their land to
agriculture, open space, and compatible uses. A LAFCO
cannot approve a change to a sphere of influence of
Williamson Act contracted land if the city or special
district provides sewers, nonagricultural water, or
streets unless those facilities or services benefit the
land uses allowed under the Williamson Act contract and
the landowner consents (Section 56426.5 of the
Government Code, added by AB 2370 (Thomson), Chapter
614, Statutes of 2002). LAFCOs note that the number of
this code section duplicates the number of the code
section added by the 1989 Davis bill. This bill
renumbers the code section without substantive change.
3. Landowner consent . If all of the landowners of the
AB 1582
Page
3
affected territory apply to LAFCO for certain boundary
changes or if another government's application for
certain boundary changes has the written consent of all
of the landowners of the affected territory, a LAFCO can
approve or disapprove the proposal without notice,
hearing, or election. In the case of legally
uninhabited territory, a LAFCO can waive the protest
proceedings if all of the landowners in the affected
territory give their written consent (Section 56663 of
the Government Code). LAFCOs say that when the affected
territory includes land owned by railroad companies, it
is hard to get the railroads to pay attention to these
requests. As a result, LAFCOs cannot use the expedited
statutory procedures on otherwise noncontroversial
boundary changes. This bill allows a LAFCO to waive the
protest proceedings for boundary changes affecting
legally uninhabited territory if a private railroad
company does not submit written opposition to the
proposed waiver of protest proceedings.
4. Protest petitions . If a LAFCO approves a proposed
boundary change for a city or special district, the
commission must hold a public hearing to count protests
by registered voters or landowners. Depending on the
amount of protests, the proposed boundary change can go
forward, go forward subject to voter approval, or stop.
These written protests must state whether the protest
comes from a landowner or registered voter and contain
identifying information (Sections 57051 and 57052 of the
Government Code). The First District Court of Appeals
reviewed this language in Citizens for Responsible Open
Space v. San Mateo County Local Agency Formation
Commission (2008). The Court concluded that while there
may be ambiguity, the Legislature's intent was clear.
LAFCOs want the Legislature to resolve the statutory
ambiguity, effectively codifying the Court's 2008
decision. This bill requires protest petitions to
contain the same information that current law already
requires for petitions that initiate boundary changes.
5. Incorporation elections . General law cities can elect
their city councils at-large (citywide), by districts
(only the voters in the district vote for the
candidates), or from districts (candidates must live in
AB 1582
Page
4
the district but run citywide) (Section 34871 of the
Government Code). When a LAFCO approves of a proposal
to incorporate a new city, the commission's formal
resolution must allow the voters to decide whether
future city councils will be elected by district or at
large (Section 57116 of the Government Code). LAFCOs
note that this statute ignores the opportunity to elect
future city councils from districts. This bill adds
"from district" city council elections to the list of
choices that voters have when voting on city
incorporations.
6. Reorganization election costs . If the voters approve a
proposed reorganization (i.e., a collection of boundary
changes combined into a single proposal; Section 56073
of the Government Code), state law tells the "affected
local agencies" that they must pay for the election
costs (Section 57150 of the Government Code). In LAFCO
parlance, "affected local agency" means every city,
county, or special district that contains the affected
territory (Section 56014 of the Government Code).
LAFCOs say that it's unfair to make the "affected local
agencies" pay for an election if their boundaries aren't
the subject of the reorganization. LAFCOs want to limit
the obligation to pay to just those agencies whose
boundaries are the subject of the reorganization; in
LAFCO dialect, the "subject agencies" (Section 56077 of
the Government Code). This bill shifts the
responsibility to pay for a successful reorganization
from the affected local agencies to the subject local
agencies.
Comment
When statutory problems appear in the state law affecting
LAFCOs, the Assembly Local Government Committee avoids
legislative costs by combining several changes to the state
laws into a single, consensus bill. By carefully reviewing
each item with the affected parties, the Committee also
avoids controversy. The changes made by this bill do not
raise statewide policy questions. They make this complex
statute easier for property owners, residents, and local
officials to use.
AB 1582
Page
5
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/18/09)
California Association of Local Agency Formation
Commissions (source)
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Duvall, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher,
Fong, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,
Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Krekorian, Lieu,
Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, John A. Perez, V. Manuel
Perez, Portantino, Price, Ruskin, Salas, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson,
Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuentes, Nava, Saldana
AGB:mw 6/18/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****