BILL ANALYSIS
SB 113
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 1, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Anna Marie Caballero, Chair
SB 113 (Committee on Local Government) - As Amended: June 25,
2009
SENATE VOTE : 35-0
SUBJECT : Local Government Omnibus Act of 2009.
SUMMARY : Enacts the "Local Government Omnibus Act of 2009" and
makes 39 changes to the state laws affecting local agencies'
powers and duties. Specifically, this bill makes changes in the
following subject areas:
1)County law libraries . Nearly 120 years ago, the Legislature
set up a system of county law libraries. Each county law
library has an appointed board of trustees that supervises its
operations and finances.
a) Governance in San Diego County . Most county law
libraries have boards of trustees composed of six or seven
members, appointed by the superior court judges and the
county board of supervisors. Special legislation for the
board of trustees of the San Diego County law library calls
for four judges and three local attorneys. According to
the Council of California County Law Librarians (CCCLL),
the San Diego law library says seven trustees are too few
to handle the work in San Diego County. SB 113 increases
the number of judges from four to up to five and the number
of attorneys from three to up to four on the board of
trustees of the San Diego County law library.
b) Vacancies . A board of trustees may remove a trustee
"who neglects to attend or absents himself" from board
meetings. CCCLL wants the Legislature to clarify the
standard for removing trustees who do not participate. SB
113 allows a board of trustees to remove a trustee who is
absent from three consecutive meetings.
SB 113
Page 2
c) Insert gender-neutral language . CCCLL wants the
Legislature to replace the statute's references to males
with gender-neutral language in two sections:
i) The board's secretary must certify documents "under
his hand."
ii) The board's secretary must verify the financial
report "by his oath."
SB 113 inserts gender-neutral language into those sections.
d) Correct fees for law library funds . In 2005, the
Legislature adopted a uniform civil filing fee schedule
that combined various surcharges and add-on fees into one
filing fee so that the same fee will be charged for the
same services in every county. Some of that fee revenue
goes to the county law libraries, but the amount varies by
county and fee increases were allowed through 2007. CCCLL
wants the Legislature to change the listed amounts to
reflect the current fees for 39 county law libraries. SB
113 changes the amount of court filing fees that go to the
county law libraries in 39 counties.
e) Increase the limits on revolving funds . The board of
trustees may create a revolving fund to pay for smaller
items. In 2005, the Legislature raised the limit on these
revolving funds from $7,500 to $30,000, and raised the
limit on paying for single items by check from $750 to
$3,000. Between 2005 and 2009, the Consumer Price Index
increased 12%. CCCLL says these statutory limits are
outdated and wants the Legislature to increase them. SB
113 increases the limit on county law libraries' revolving
funds from $30,000 to $50,000, and the limit on single
payments by check from $3,000 to $10,000.
f) Payment vouchers . When the board of trustees wants to
spend money, current law requires the board's president and
secretary to certify a voucher. CCCLL says many counties
have changed the approval process for issuing payments and
the use of signed vouchers is now outdated. SB 113 deletes
the requirement that the president and secretary of a
SB 113
Page 3
county law library' boards of trustees sign payment
vouchers.
g) Employee titles . The board of trustees can appoint and
remove the librarian and other officers and assistants, as
well as set their salaries and require bonds. CCCLL says
these job titles are outdated and wants the Legislature to
use modern terms. SB 113 refers to a county law library's
employees as the law librarian and law library employees.
h) Retirement benefits . Since 1943, the board of trustees
has been able to provide retirement benefits to its
employees by contracting with the Board of Administration
of the State Employees' Retirement System. CCCLL wants the
statute to use the correct name of the state's retirement
program. SB 113 inserts the name of the California Public
Employees' Retirement System.
i) Allow more service contracts . A board of trustees can
contract with a law library association to make use of its
library as a public law library. CCCLL wants the
Legislature to allow county law libraries to contract with
a wider range of entities.
SB 113 allows the board of trustees also to contract with
another law library board, superior court, or legal-related
entity, including a self-help group or other organization
that provides a similar service, to provide law library
services.
j) Repeal the limit on real property spending . A board of
trustees can acquire, lease, or build a law library
building with its surplus funds, but the board cannot spend
the first $10,000 of its surplus funds for these purposes.
The Council notes the Legislature imposed the reserve
amount in 1941, but has never increased it. CCCLL says
that because a board of trustees has full authority to
manage its trust funds, the statutory reserve is
unnecessary. SB 113 repeals the $10,000 reserve on the law
libraries' spending for acquiring, leasing, or building law
library buildings.
SB 113
Page 4
aa) Repeal the limit on courtrooms . When a board of
trustees erects a building to house the law library, it can
include courtrooms, but state law limits the number of
courtrooms to four. CCCLL says there is no reason to limit
the number of courtrooms in a building that houses the
county law library and wants the Legislature to repeal that
limit. SB 113 deletes the limit on the number of
courtrooms that can be in a building that houses a county
law library.
bb) Ease the limits on real property sales . Except for real
property that a county law library acquired by dedication,
the board of trustees can sell its property to the state or
any other government agency with the proceeds going to the
law library fund. CCCLL says these statutory restrictions
are not necessary and wants the Legislature to allow county
law libraries to sell their real property to anyone,
provided the proceeds go to the law library fund. SB 113
repeals the prohibition on county law libraries selling
real property they acquired through dedications. SB 113
repeals the requirement that county law libraries sell
their real property to the state or other governmental
agencies.
cc) Expand surplus fund investments . With the approval of
the county treasurer, the board of trustees can invest its
surplus funds in federal or state bonds. CCCLL says the
county treasurer's approval is unnecessary because a board
of trustees has full authority over its trust funds.
Further, CCCLL wants statutory authority for law libraries
to invest their trust funds in the Local Agency Investment
Fund run by the Treasurer. SB 113 repeals the requirement
for a board of trustees to get the county treasurer's
permission to invest its surplus funds. SB 113 allows a
board of trustees to invest its surplus funds in the
Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund.
dd) Allow more county construction contracts . A board of
trustees can contract with the county board of supervisors
to build a law library building, but this authority applies
only in counties with populations between 400,000 and
SB 113
Page 5
700,000. When the Legislature passed this law in 1957,
only San Diego County met these criteria. In 2008, the
Department of Finance estimated seven counties had
populations between 400,000 and 700,000: Monterey, San
Joaquin, Santa Barbara, Stanislaus, Solano, Sonoma, and
Tulare. CCCLL wants the law libraries in all counties to
be authorized to contract with their county boards of
supervisors to build law libraries. SB 113 deletes the
population criteria in the state law that allows law
libraries to contract with their counties to build law
libraries.
ee) Delay the annual reports . The board of trustees must
file an annual report with the county board of supervisors
by August 15 for the fiscal year that ended on June 30.
CCCLL says the boards of trustees rely on the county
auditors' fiscal year end reports, which may not be
available in time to meet the August 15 statutory deadline.
CCCLL wants the Legislature to extend the due date to
October 15. SB 113 extends the deadline for the boards of
trustees to file their annual reports with the county
boards of supervisors from August 15 to October 15.
ff) Effectiveness . County boards of supervisors have the
discretion to make the state laws that apply to county law
libraries effective in their counties. The Legislature
retained this provision of the original 1891 statute when
it recodified the law in 1941. Because county law
libraries now exist in all 58 counties, CCCLL says this
local discretion is no longer necessary. SB 113 repeals
the discretion of county boards of supervisors to make the
state laws apply to their county law libraries.
2)School facilities improvement districts . School districts can
finance improvements with district-wide, voter-approved
general obligation bonds. School districts also can finance
improvements with voter-approved general obligation bonds
issued by "school facilities improvement districts" that are
less than districtwide. School districts cannot use the
school facilities improvement district law unless the county
board of supervisors adopts a resolution. In 2008, the Los
SB 113
Page 6
Angeles County Board of Supervisors gave the Alhambra Unified
School District permission to ask its voters to approve
general obligation bonds by using a less than
districtwide school facilities improvement district. Los
Angeles County officials say the statutory language is
ambiguous. They want to clarify that the county supervisors'
approval to use the school facilities improvement district
statute could be either countywide or could be limited to
particular school districts. SB 113 allows a county board of
supervisors' approval to use the school facilities improvement
district statute to be either countywide or limited to
particular school districts.
3)Appropriations limits for new local governments . Public
agencies must adopt annual appropriations limits and the
voters must establish the initial appropriations limit for new
local governments under the California Constitution. State
law explains how to set the appropriations limits for new
local governments with specific procedures for new counties,
new special districts, and new cities. There are also special
procedures for cities that incorporated in the late 1980s.
Local officials note the special procedures for those new
cities have become irrelevant because the cities now adopt
annual appropriations limits. Further, they note the
statutory cross-references to the specific procedures are
incorrect with references to code sections that no longer
exist after the Legislature revised the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg
Local Government Reorganization Act. They want the
Legislature to repeal the obsolete provisions relating to
cities that incorporated in the late 1980s and to correct the
statutory cross-references. SB 113 repeals the obsolete
provisions relating to cities that incorporated in the late
1980s and corrects the statutory cross-references in the
statute that explains how new local governments set their
appropriations limits.
4)County boundary change cross-reference . State law spells out
the procedures that counties follow when making minor boundary
changes. These changes are not subject to review by local
agency formation commissions (LAFCOs). The Senate Local
SB 113
Page 7
Government Committee's staff notes the cross-reference to the
LAFCO statutes is obsolete and wants the Legislature to
correct the citation. SB 113 corrects the citation to the
LAFCO statute in the state law that spells out the procedures
for counties' minor boundary changes.
5)Amador County's public administrator . State law requires
voters to elect 10 county officers, including the public
administrator. Counties can appoint several other officers,
including the public guardian. County supervisors can convert
elected offices into appointed offices with voter approval. A
dozen counties can convert the public administrator's office
from an elected to an appointed position by ordinance and
without voter approval: Glenn, Lake, Lassen, Madera,
Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, Solano, Sonoma, Trinity, Tuolumne,
and Ventura. Seven counties can appoint the same person as
the public administrator and the public guardian: Glenn,
Kings, Lassen, Monterey, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura. Eight
counties can separate the consolidated offices of district
attorney and public administrator in order to consolidate
these offices with other offices: Glenn, Lake, Lassen, Madera,
Mendocino, Napa, Trinity, and Tuolumne.
In Amador County, the elective office of public administrator
is currently consolidated with the elective office of district
attorney while the county board of supervisors appoints the
public guardian. To achieve management efficiencies, Amador
County officials want to combine the offices of the public
administrator and the public guardian and allow the district
attorney to focus on law enforcement. Amador County officials
want legislative permission to achieve this reorganization
without having to hold a local election. SB 113 adds Amador
County to the list of counties that can:
a) Convert the public administrator's office from an
elected to an appointed position by ordinance and without
voter approval;
b) Appoint the same person as public administrator and
public guardian; and,
SB 113
Page 8
c) Separate the consolidated offices of district attorney
and public administrator in order to consolidate those
offices with other offices.
6)Latent power cross-reference . Both the County Service Area
Law and the Community Services District Law explain how LAFCOs
control these special districts' "latent powers." LAFCOs must
rely on inventories of the districts' services and functions
prepared as part of their spheres of influence. A
practitioner notes that both of these statutes contain an
incorrect cross-reference to the special districts' spheres of
influence and wants the Legislature to correct the citations.
SB 113 corrects the citation to special districts' spheres of
influence in the County Service Area Law and the Community
Services District Law.
7)County service contracts . Nine counties have the statutory
authority to provide a limited list of services by contract to
private firms that require special experience, education, and
training, including training materials and facilities, law
enforcement, fire protection, and public health. Nine
counties now have this authority: Butte, Kings, Los Angeles,
Merced, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Santa Clara, and
Ventura. The Legislature added Riverside County to the list
in 1997, and, in 1998, legislators added Kings County. Sonoma
County wants the Legislature to add it to this statutory list
and to expand the range of authorized services to include
maintenance and construction services. SB 113 allows Sonoma
County to provide county services to private firms by
contract. SB 113 expands the list of authorized services to
include maintenance and construction services.
8)County purchasing agents . State law allows county boards of
supervisors to hire purchasing agents to act without separate
authorizations when buying supplies, renting equipment, and
contracting for services. In counties with a population of
less than 200,000, the county supervisors can authorize their
purchasing agents to contract for services when the "aggregate
cost" does not exceed $50,000, adjusted by the Consumer Price
Index. In counties with populations over 200,000 the
"aggregate cost" limit is $100,000. Napa County officials say
SB 113
Page 9
their County Counsel believes the term "aggregate cost"
implies a lifetime accrual and not an annual limit. They want
the Legislature to clarify these statutory limits apply
annually. SB 113 clarifies the statutory limits on county
purchasing agents are annual aggregate amounts.
9)Revisions to the county budget act . State law spells out the
procedures county officials must follow when adopting their
annual budgets. The statute has remained relatively unchanged
since the Legislature revised these procedures nearly 25 years
ago. Starting in January 2007, a subcommittee of the
Controller's Advisory Committee on County Accounting
Procedures reviewed the statutory requirements and recommended
numerous changes. The Advisory Committee looked for ways to
reduce the counties' costs of complying with redundant
reporting and filing requirements. The Controller wants the
Legislature to revise the County Budget Act to reflect these
recommendations. SB 113 revises the state statutes that spell
out the procedures that county officials must follow when
adopting their annual budgets. SB 113 includes changes to
more than 55 code sections that:
a) Formally name the County Budget Act;
b) Clarify the statutory definitions and their consistent
uses;
c) Clarify outdated statutory language;
d) Sort out the duties of county administrators and county
auditors;
e) Advance county officials' deadlines for acting; and,
f) Repeal obsolete sections.
10)Obsolete property tax reduction fund . Before Proposition 13,
passed in 1978, every local government set its own annual
property tax rate. Now the California Constitution sets a
uniform 1% property tax rate, although local officials can set
a lower property tax rate for their own jurisdiction. Since
SB 113
Page 10
1965, state law has allowed a county board of supervisors to
put aside money into a "property tax reduction fund" and spend
the money to lower the county government's property tax rate.
The Senate Local Government Committee's staff believes no
county currently has a property tax reduction fund and the
statute is obsolete because of Proposition 13. They want the
Legislature to repeal this obsolete statute. SB 113 repeals
the authorization for a county property tax reduction fund.
11)Sonoma County's obsolete tax . In 1977, the Legislature
authorized Sonoma County to raise the local transactions and
use tax for public transit with majority-voter approval.
Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 require two-thirds voter
approval before local governments can levy special taxes to
raise revenue for special purposes. With two-thirds voter
approval, any county can levy a higher transactions and use
tax rate as a special tax. The Senate Local Government
Committee's staff believes the Legislature should repeal the
1977 Sonoma County transactions and use tax statute because
Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 made it obsolete. SB 113
repeals the statute that allows Sonoma County to raise its
transactions and use tax for public transit with
majority-voter approval.
12)City council members' salaries . City council members in
general law cities can receive monthly salaries based on a
statutory schedule. The bigger the city, the higher the
maximum salary:
1. Population Statutory
Limit
2. Less than 35,000 $300/month
3. 35,001 - 50,000 $400/month
4. 50,001 - 75,000 $500/month
5. 75,001 - 150,000 $600/month
6. 150,001 - 250,000$800/month
7. More than 250,000$1,000/month
City councils can raise their salaries above these statutory
limits by up to 5% a year by ordinance. Further, the voters
can approve salaries that are different from the statutory
schedule. All salary adjustments must be adopted by
SB 113
Page 11
referendable local ordinances. The law prohibits automatic
future increases in salary. Changes to city council members'
salaries are operative only after the next election; once a
salary ordinance becomes operative, then all council members
are eligible for pay raises. The last time the Legislature
raised the city council members' salary schedule was in 1984.
By 2007, the California Consumer Price Index had increased by
108%. When the Legislature tried to reset the statutory
salary schedule to reflect inflation, Governor Schwarzenegger
vetoed AB 701 (De La Torre, 2007). The Senate Local
Government Committee's staff wants the Legislature to reformat
the current statute to clarify how city councils and local
voters can set and change city council members' salaries. SB
113 reformats the statute governing city council members'
salaries for clarity. Unlike the 2007 bill, SB 113 does not
change the current statutory schedule.
SB 113 also clarifies city council members may waive their
compensation.
13)Surplus funds cross-reference (bonds and notes) . Local
officials can invest their temporarily idle funds in various
financial instruments. When the Legislature allowed local
agencies to invest their surplus funds in registered bonds or
notes, the bill also changed the lettering of the statutory
subdivisions. As a result of that relettering, an adjacent
code section now contains an incorrect cross-reference to
subdivision (k) in 53601. County treasurers want the
Legislature to correct the cross-reference. SB 113 corrects
an erroneous cross-reference in the state law that allows for
the investment of temporarily idle funds.
14)Surplus funds cross-reference . Local officials can invest
their temporarily idle funds in various financial instruments.
In 2006, the Legislature allowed local agencies to invest
some of their surplus funds in certificates of deposit issued
by a private sector placement service that meets specified
conditions. County treasurers note the new authorization
includes an incorrect cross-reference to certificates of
deposit and want the Legislature to correct this error. SB
113 corrects the citation to certificates of deposit in the
state law that allows for the investment of temporarily idle
SB 113
Page 12
funds.
15)Obsolete reporting requirement . The California Debt and
Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) is the state's
information clearinghouse for state and local government debt.
The Treasurer chairs this nine-member commission. After the
Orange County bankruptcy, the Legislature required local
treasurers to provide annual statements of investment policies
and quarterly investment reports to their legislative bodies.
In 2000, the Legislature required local officials to send
copies of their quarterly reports to CDIAC until January 1,
2007. The Local Government Omnibus Act of 2008 deleted most
of these obsolete requirements, but neglected to repeal the
requirement for local officials to send their quarterly
reports to CDIAC. On behalf of CDIAC, Treasurer Bill Lockyer
requests the Legislature eliminate this obsolete provision.
SB 113 deletes the obsolete requirement for local officials to
send their quarterly investment reports to CDIAC.
16)Obsolete special municipal tax districts . State law allows
cities to create "special municipal tax districts" and levy an
ad valorem property tax with majority-voter approval to pay
for maintenance and operations or special local services.
However, Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 prohibit
additional ad valorem property taxes for services and require
two-thirds voter approval before local governments can levy
special taxes to raise revenue for special purposes.
Consistent with these constitutional requirements, cities can
levy special taxes with two-thirds voter approval. The Senate
Local Government Committee's staff believes the Legislature
should repeal the 1919 special municipal tax district statute
because Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 made it obsolete.
SB 113 repeals the statute that allows cities to set up
special municipal tax districts. [69]
17)CSD name change . The Community Services District Law allows
community services districts (CSDs) to change their names
provided they keep the words "community services district" in
the new name. When a CSD changes its name, it must notify the
Secretary of State, the county clerk, the county board of
supervisors, and the LAFCO. Local officials want CSDs with
SB 113
Page 13
new names to also notify the State Board of Equalization and
the county auditor-controllers because those officials are
responsible for allocating property tax revenues. SB 113
requires a community services district that changes its name
also to notify the State Board of Equalization and the county
auditor in each county where the CSD is located.
18)Map Act and biogas projects . The Subdivision Map Act (Map
Act) governs how counties and cities approve the division of
larger properties into smaller lots, including subdivision
design and improvements. The Map Act defines a "subdivision"
as the division of land for the purpose of sale, lease, or
financing. However, the Map Act specifically exempts several
types of land divisions, including leases and easements for
wind-powered electrical-generation devices, provided the
project is subject to local discretionary approval, and leases
and easements for solar-electrical-generation devices if the
project is subject to other local agency ordinances regarding
design and improvement or if the project is subject to local
discretionary approval. Sempra Energy wants a similar
exemption for biogas projects. This exemption was in AB 1510
(Plescia, 2008), which the Legislature passed and Governor
Schwarzenegger signed, but the change was chaptered-out.
Sempra wants legislators to try again. SB 113 exempts from the
Subdivision Map Act leases and easements for biogas projects
that use agricultural waste or byproducts from the land where
the project is located and that reduce greenhouse gas
emissions if the project is subject to other local agency
ordinances regarding design and improvement or if the project
is subject to local discretionary approval.
19)Lot line adjustment deadlines . The Map Act contains
deadlines for local officials to act on applications for
tentative maps. The Permit Streamlining Act sets deadlines,
which are coordinated with reviews under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for public officials to
approve or disapprove development projects:
a) 180 days after certifying an environmental impact report
(EIR);
SB 113
Page 14
b) 90 days after certifying an EIR for an affordable
housing project;
c) 60 days after adopting a negative declaration; and,
d) 60 days after certifying that the project is exempt from
CEQA review.
The Permit Streamlining Act's deadlines cannot extend the Map
Act's deadlines. The Map Act does not apply to lot line
adjustments -- which involve four or fewer parcels -- approved
by local officials, where land taken from one parcel is added
to an adjoining parcel without creating any new parcels.
Surveyors and engineers say their applications for lot line
adjustments can be delayed because there is no clear statutory
time limit by which local officials must act. They want the
Legislature to require cities and counties to approve lot line
adjustments pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act. This
change was in SB 1237 (Cox, 2008), which Governor
Schwarzenegger vetoed, saying the bill was not a high
priority. Senator Cox still wants the Legislature to make
that change. SB 113 requires cities and counties to approve
or disapprove lot line adjustments pursuant to the Permit
Streamlining Act.
20)Remainder parcels . Under the Map Act, a major subdivision
creates five or more parcels and requires both a tentative map
and a final map. A minor subdivision (lot split) creates four
or fewer parcels and usually needs only a parcel map. When a
subdivision affects only part of a property, the unaffected
property is called a "designated remainder parcel" or an
"omitted parcel." It is illegal to avoid a major subdivision
by repeatedly using lot splits to create many parcels, called
"4x4-ing." However, the Map Act says state law does not
prohibit consecutive subdivisions of the same parcel. The Map
Act sets out detailed requirements for the size, shape, and
contents of the subdivision documents, both final maps and
parcel maps. Final maps and parcel maps must clearly
designate the subdivision's exterior boundary. A final map or
parcel map for a subdivision with a designated remainder
parcel of five or more acres does not have to show the
SB 113
Page 15
remainder parcel. Instead of surveying the remainder parcel,
its location can be indicated by deed reference. Surveyors
and engineers say that some cities and counties still require
them to show the remainder parcel on a final map or parcel
map. They want the Legislature to clarify the exterior
boundary on a final map or parcel map does not need to include
a designated remainder parcel or omitted parcel. This change
was in
SB 1237 (Cox, 2008), which Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed,
saying the bill was not a high priority. Senator Cox still
wants the Legislature to make that change. SB 113 declares
the exterior boundary of the land shown on a final map or
parcel map shall not include a designated remainder parcel or
omitted parcel, but any designated remainder parcel or omitted
parcel must be labeled.
21)Map Act dedications . As a condition of approving
subdivisions under the Map Act, cities and counties often
require subdividers to dedicate property for public purposes,
including drainage, public utilities, bicycle paths, transit
facilities, solar energy easements, parks, roads, alleys,
coastal and water access, and schools. Some of these property
dedications are in fee while other property dedications are
public easements over private property. Surveyors and
engineers say local officials use various terms for these
dedications, resulting in later confusion over whether the
property was dedicated in fee or as an easement. They want
the Legislature to standardize the language that appears on
subdivision maps to make it clear whether a property
dedication is in fee or whether the dedication is an easement.
This change was in SB 1237 (Cox, 2008), which Governor
Schwarzenegger vetoed, saying the bill was not a high
priority. Senator Cox still wants the Legislature to make
that change. SB 113 standarizes the language on final maps
and parcel maps regarding the dedication of property in fee or
as easements.
22)Interment rights in cemetery districts . In 2003, the
Legislature modernized and recodified the Public Cemetery
District Law, which governs California's 252 cemetery
districts. Since then, cemetery district officials have been
SB 113
Page 16
considering further, more substantive statutory changes.
Although their principal act explains how cemetery districts
manage interment rights, the Public Cemetery District Law does
not define this term. The California Association of Public
Cemeteries (CAPC) wants the Legislature to adopt a statutory
definition of "interment right." SB 113 defines "interment
right" within the Public Cemetery District Law.
23)Cemetery districts' endowment funds . Except for larger
cemetery districts that can manage their own funds, the county
treasurer serves as a cemetery district's treasurer. Cemetery
districts must collect a payment for each interment and
deposit the money in an "endowment care fund." The districts
cannot spend the principal, but the income goes into an
"endowment income fund" to care for the cemeteries. Cemetery
districts can invest the endowment care fund's principal in
high-quality paper, including certificates of deposit or other
interest-bearing bank accounts that are insured by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Company. The districts can invest the
endowment income fund in the same types of high-quality paper
that other local governments can use for their temporarily
idle funds. The Senate Local Government Committee's
commentary notes these sections reverse the 1949 Attorney
General's opinion that had said the county treasurer was the
repository for the endowment funds (For Years To Come: A
Legislative History of Senate Bill 341 and the "Public
Cemetery District Law," pp. 70 & 71). CAPC wants the
Legislature to clarify the cemetery districts can withdraw
their endowment funds from the county treasuries and invest
them on their own. SB 113 clarifies cemetery districts can
invest their endowment funds in certificates of deposit or
other interest-bearing bank accounts of any state or federally
chartered bank or savings association that the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation insures.
24)Cemetery districts' funds . Although the cemetery districts'
principal act tells them how to manage their funds, CAPC notes
state law does not explain where to deposit the money that
they collect. CAPC wants the Legislature to require cemetery
districts to deposit the money they collect into the county
treasury. SB 113 requires public cemetery districts to
SB 113
Page 17
deposit the funds they collect into the county treasury by the
10th of the month following the month in which they collect
the money.
25)Cemetery districts' revolving funds . State law lets cemetery
districts set up revolving funds, cross-referencing the state
law that allows all special districts to establish revolving
funds to make change and pay small bills directly. State law
caps special districts' revolving funds at $1,000, but
cemetery districts' revolving funds may be as much as 110% of
one-twelfth of a district's annual budget. CAPC says having
statutory authority in both the principal act and in the state
law that applies to all special districts is confusing. CAPC
wants the Legislature to put this authority within the Public
Cemetery District Law and make it clear a cemetery district
can set up a revolving fund that is either (a) a $1,000 petty
cash fund or (b) the larger amount based on its adopted
budget. SB 113 revises the state laws governing public
cemetery districts' revolving funds, clarifying a cemetery
district can set up a revolving fund that is either (a) a
$1,000 petty cash fund or (b) the larger amount, based on its
adopted budget.
26)Air pollution control districts' boards . Most air pollution
control districts (APCDs) cover just one county and the county
board of supervisors is the APCD's governing board. However,
a county board of supervisors and the cities in that county
may agree to include city representatives on an APCD's
governing board. The city selection committee, composed of
the mayors of each city in that county, selects the city
representatives. If the agreement provides for representation
by each city, then each city selects its own representative.
The city representatives must be mayors or council members and
the county representatives must be county supervisors. There
is no statutory authority for either the city selection
committee or the individual cities to select alternate
representatives to serve when the regular city representatives
are absent or disqualified from participating. Under its own
statutory formula, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD) has a 14-member board of
directors. When SMAQMD had trouble achieving a quorum because
SB 113
Page 18
enough city representatives could not attend, it received
legislative permission for the cities to appoint alternate
members. The Butte County AQMD (BCAQMD) has a 10-member
governing board composed of all five county supervisors and a
city representative from each of the five cities: Biggs,
Chico, Gridley, Oroville, and Paradise. Because BCAQMD's
board meets during the day, sometimes it is hard for all of
the city representatives to attend. As part-time city council
members, they work regular jobs. When a city's representative
cannot attend, that community lacks representation during
policy discussions and regulatory decisions. BCAQMD wants
legislators to allow cities to appoint alternates, similar to
what the Legislature did for the SMAQMD. SB 113 allows the
city selection committee and the city councils to appoint
alternates to their representatives on the governing boards of
county air pollution control districts.
27)Archaic requirements for local taxes . Proposition 13 capped
the maximum ad valorem property tax rate at 1% of full cash
value. Extraordinary property tax rates above the 1% limit
are possible only for certain types of voter-approved debt.
With two-thirds voter approval, local officials may levy
special taxes. Despite the 30-year old constitutional cap on
property tax rates, a few older statutes still allow counties
and cities to levy special taxes with higher ad valorem rates.
These statutes are probably unconstitutional. In Revenues
And Responsibilities (December 2007), the staff of the Senate
Local Government Committee identified several statutory
authorizations for special taxes that fall outside the 1%
limit. The Local Government Omnibus Act of 2008 revised four
of these obsolete taxes for county musical performances,
county trade and commerce programs, county public airports,
and city hospitals. The Senate Local Government Committee's
staff has identified additional obsolete references to ad
valorem property tax rates, and wants the Legislature to
substitute the cross-reference to the statute that requires
two-thirds voter approval for special taxes. SB 113 deletes
obsolete references to separate property tax rates, and
instead, inserts the appropriate cross-references to local
special taxes for:
SB 113
Page 19
a) County special tax for sanitary purposes in
unincorporated areas;
b) County special tax for veterans' homes; and,
c) County special tax for veterans' memorial halls.
28)County recorders and federal vital records . County recorders
may record birth certificates and death certificates issued by
federal agencies to authenticate births and deaths of U.S.
citizens outside of the United States. A certification of
birth outside of the United States must be indexed in the
county recorder's birth index. County recorders say confusion
can result when an individual seeking a certified copy of a
federally issued vital record requests a copy of that document
from a county recorder's office. Copies of federally issued
documents that have been recorded with a county cannot be used
as authorized vital records to establish a person's identity;
they are merely copies of the county's official records. To
obtain authorized copies of federal vital records, individuals
must contact the federal agency that issued the original
document. To avoid confusion, county recorders want to
prohibit the recording and indexing of federally issued
foreign birth and death records and clarify that copies of
these documents already recorded are to be issued by county
recorders only as official, but not vital, records. SB 113
repeals county recorders' authority to record federal birth
certificates and death certificates, and instead, requires
county recorders to issue certified copies of foreign births
or deaths only as official records and not as vital records.
SB 113 repeals the requirement for county recorders to index
federal birth certificates in the county recorder's birth
index, except for court ordered documents that establish
foreign births and deaths.
29)County waterworks districts' contracts . County boards of
supervisors are the ex officio governing bodies for most of
the 29 county waterworks districts that operate under the
County Waterworks District Law. The Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works manages five county waterworks
districts for which the Los Angeles County Board of
SB 113
Page 20
Supervisors is the governing body. County waterworks
districts must award contracts worth more than $3,500 to the
lowest responsible bidder. The districts can use informal
bidding procedures to award contracts worth less than $7,500.
The districts can delegate contracting duties to county or
city purchasing agents for contracts worth less than $3,500.
Los Angeles County officials explain these state laws do not
distinguish between contracting for public works projects and
contracting for professional services. As a result, county
officials must follow public bidding procedures for the county
waterworks districts' service contracts. They want
legislators to distinguish between public works contracts and
professional service contracts, allowing the districts to
award contracts for professional services just like counties.
SB 113 clarifies that county waterworks districts must follow
public bidding procedures when awarding contracts for public
works. SB 113 allows county waterworks districts to contract
for professional services and special services by following
the statutes that apply to counties and other public agencies.
30)Alquist-Priolo Act exemption for state historic structures .
After the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake destroyed two
hospitals, the Legislature passed the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) to prevent
building on top of active faults. The State Geologist
publishes maps that are the basis for development regulations
within the Earthquake Fault Zones. Before they can approve a
project within an Earthquake Fault Zone, cities and counties
must require a geologic report. The Alquist-Priolo Act
exempts five types of projects:
a) Condominium conversions;
b) Structures built before May 4, 1975, unless the
alterations or additions are more than 50% of a structure's
value;
c) Alterations or additions where the value is less than
50% of a structure's value;
SB 113
Page 21
d) Structures damaged by the 1991 Berkeley-Oakland Hills
fire that get state waivers; and,
e) Alterations that include seismic retrofitting on three
specified types of structures built before May 4, 1975, if:
i) The local building permit does not permit a greater
human occupancy load;
ii) Local officials require seismic retrofitting to
strengthen the structure for increased resistance to
ground shaking; and,
iii) Local officials report their exemptions to the State
Geologist within 30 days.
Qualified historic buildings within earthquake fault zones can
be exempt from the Alquist-
Priolo Act's requirements, and instead, retrofitted under the
State Historical Building Code,
provided those buildings get the local approvals required by
the fifth exemption. The
Hayward Fault passes directly under the California Memorial
Stadium on the University of
California-Berkeley campus. Originally built in 1923 and now
on the National Register of
Historic Places, the stadium seats over 72,000 people. After
a 1998 seismic safety study
gave the Memorial Stadium a "poor" rating, campus officials
started planning seismic and
disabled access improvements. UC officials say there is
ambiguity in how the Alquist-Priolo
Act may apply to retrofitting Memorial Stadium. For example,
the Alquist-Priolo Act
exempts alterations where the value is less than 50% of the
structure's value, and how could
UC officials calculate the value of an 85-year old stadium?
The Alquist-Priolo Act also
exempts seismic retrofitting that involves local building
permits, and UC is exempt from the
SB 113
Page 22
City of Berkeley's building permit system. To avoid
controversy and lawsuits, the
University of California wants the Legislature to create
another exception to the Alquist-
Priolo Act. SB 113 exempts from the Alquist-Priolo Act
alterations to structures owned and
operated by state entities and agencies that are listed on the
California Register of Historical
Resources or the National Register of Historic Places,
including the California Memorial
Stadium.
31)Archaic reimbursement for special districts . Most special
districts operate under a series of "principal acts" that
govern their powers, duties, and procedures. For example, the
seven resort improvement districts operate under the Resort
Improvement District Law and the eight water storage
districts operate under the California Water Storage District
Law. It is common for special districts' principal acts to
spell out the types and amounts of compensation that the
districts can pay to their governing boards. However, state
law also generally limits the compensation that special
districts can pay their governing boards, including allowing
districts to pay for their "actual and necessary expenses."
Further, local officials must take ethics training if they
receive compensation. The California Special Districts
Association (CSDA) notes that both the Resort Improvement
District Law and the California Water Storage District Law
contain archaic mileage reimbursement rates. Resort
improvement districts can pay only 15
a mile and water � storage districts can pay only 10
a mile. CSDA wants the � Legislature to repeal these archaic mileage limits and let the
districts pay for actual and necessary expenses. SB 113
repeals the specific mileage reimbursement rates for resort
improvement districts and water storage districts. SB 113
also explicitly requires resort improvement districts to
comply with the statewide laws on compensation and ethics
training.
32)Municipal utility districts' annual reports . All special
districts, including municipal utility districts (MUDs), must
SB 113
Page 23
send annual financial transactions reports to the Controller.
The Municipal Utility District Law requires a MUD's general
manager to publish the annual financial report in a general
circulation newspaper once a week for two successive weeks
Recognizing the cost of publishing entire ordinances, the
Legislature allowed MUDs to publish summaries of their
ordinances. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)
says publishing all 66 pages of its annual financial report
would have cost $30,000 if it ran in The Sacramento Bee.
Instead, SMUD paid $4,000 to publish it in the
lower-circulation Sacramento Gazette. SMUD officials want the
Legislature to allow MUDs to publish summaries of their annual
reports. SB 113 allows municipal utility districts to publish
summaries of their annual financial reports instead of
publishing the full reports.
33)Property tax exchanges for city annexations . Before a city
can annex territory, it must negotiate a property tax exchange
agreement with its county (Revenue & Taxation Code 99). The
property tax exchange agreement specifies the future
allocation of property tax revenues generated in the
annexation area. Cities and counties can adopt master
property tax exchange agreements, otherwise state law gives
them 60 days to negotiate a property tax exchange. If they
fail to agree, the city annexation can't proceed. In effect,
a county can veto a city annexation by refusing to agree to a
property tax exchange. In 1997, the Legislature created a
three-step alternative dispute resolution process involving a
consultant, a mediator, and an arbitrator, but it
automatically terminated on January 1, 2005 (SB 466, Rainey,
1997). The Legislature extended the sunset date to January 1,
2010 (AB 818, Leslie, 2005). Although no one has ever used
this alternative dispute resolution procedure, the California
Association of LAFCOs says the prospect of mandatory
consultation-mediation-arbitration may have prompted some
counties to reach agreements with their cities. The LAFCOs
want the Legislature to extend for another five years the
sunset date for the mandatory
consultation-mediation-arbitration process. SB 113 extends
the sunset date for the mandatory
consultation-mediation-arbitration process for reaching a
SB 113
Page 24
property tax exchange agreement for city annexations from
January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2015.
34)County special road maintenance districts . Counties can form
special road maintenance districts in unincorporated areas and
levy ad valorem property taxes without voter approval to pay
for highways and roads. This authority is more than 125 years
old. However, Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 prohibit
additional ad valorem property taxes for services and require
two-thirds voter approval before local governments can levy
special taxes to raise revenue for special purposes.
Consistent with these constitutional requirements, counties
can levy special taxes with two-thirds voter approval. The
Senate Local Government Committee's staff believes the
Legislature should revise the statutes on counties' special
road maintenance districts to comply with Proposition 13 and
Proposition 218. SB 113 revises the statutes that allow
counties to set up special road maintenance districts and
allows them to levy special taxes with two-thirds voter
approval.
35)Clarify 1911 Act dredging authority . The Improvement Act of
1911 allows local officials to levy benefit assessments with
the approval of property owners to pay for a wide variety of
public works projects, including harbor improvements on
tidelands that the state has granted or leased to cities. The
1911 Act specifically allows local officials to use benefit
assessments to pay for harbor channel improvements and
maintenance. The Contra Costa County Water Agency and the
Stockton Port District use 1911 Act benefit assessments to pay
for their share of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' channel
dredging. The local agencies have not acquired or leased the
channel from the state. Local officials want to clarify that
they can use 1911 Act benefit assessments for channel projects
on property the state has not granted or leased to a local
government. SB 113 allows local officials to use 1911 Act
benefit assessments to pay for channel improvements on
tidelands for which a permit, license, or easement has been
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the state.
36)Publishing water conservation ordinances . Local governments
SB 113
Page 25
that provide water can adopt water conservation programs by
enacting urgency ordinances or resolutions. Within 10 days,
the local government must publish its water conservation
ordinance or resolution "in full" in a general circulation
newspaper that is printed, published, and circulated within
the agency's boundaries. County water districts have their
own separate statutory authority to adopt emergency water
restrictions. County water districts must also publish their
water restriction ordinances in full in general circulation
newspapers. However, a county water district may instead
publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days
before its adoption and publish a summary of the adopted
ordinance within 15 days after its adoption. The full text
must be available to the public at the district's offices.
Alternatively, if it is not feasible to publish summaries, a
county water district can publish a quarter-page display
advertisement both five days before and within 15 days after
the adoption of the ordinance. The water conservation
ordinance adopted by the North Marin Water District, a county
water district, is 10 pages long. The District has amended
its water conservation ordinance 35 times. Each amendment
triggers the statutory requirement to publish the ordinance
"in full," which is expensive without much public benefit. As
an alternative to publishing the full water conservation
ordinance, the District wants the Legislature to allow local
governments to publish summaries or display advertisements,
following the approach in the County Water District Law. SB
113 allows local governments to publish summaries or display
advertisements of their water conservation ordinances both
before and after their adoption, provided the full text is
available to the public.
37)County waterworks districts' extraterritorial services .
County boards of supervisors are the ex officio governing
bodies for most of the 29 county waterworks districts that
operate under the County Waterworks District Law. The Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works manages five county
waterworks districts for which the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors is the governing body. County waterworks
districts supply water for irrigation, domestic, industrial,
and fire protection purposes. Before a special district can
SB 113
Page 26
deliver services beyond its boundaries, it needs the approval
of LAFCO. If its governing body finds that a county
waterworks district has a surplus of water, it can sell the
surplus water outside its boundaries. To avoid failures, Los
Angeles County's waterworks districts have connected their
water distribution systems to the water distribution systems
of adjacent water systems that are owned by a variety of
public agencies, mutual water companies, and private firms.
When Los Angeles County officials wanted to install a
connection between a county waterworks district and a mutual
water company in the Antelope Valley, the County Counsel's
office pointed out that state law required local officials to
determine that surplus water was available before the district
could sell water outside its boundaries. There is no surplus
water in Southern California. Los Angeles County officials
want statutory permission to sell water beyond their
districts' boundaries if the water is needed for public
health, public safety, or emergency purposes. SB 113
clarifies that a county waterworks district must obtain
LAFCO's approval before it can sell water outside its
boundaries and deletes the requirement that the water must be
surplus. SB 113 also allows a county waterworks district to
sell water outside its boundaries in response to a defined
emergency.
38)County waterworks districts' real property . When Lancaster
officials needed a piece of land owned by a county waterworks
district to improve city sidewalks, Los Angeles County
officials discovered the districts' governing statute made it
hard to cooperate with the city. Los Angeles County officials
want legislators to give them more flexibility in how they
dispose of county waterworks districts' property:
a) County waterworks districts can sell or lease surplus
property. SB 113 allows the districts to exchange surplus
property. SB 113 allows the districts to sell, exchange,
or lease surplus property rights.
b) Without public notice, county waterworks districts can
sell or lease surplus property to another county waterworks
district that it governs. SB 113 allows county waterworks
SB 113
Page 27
districts to exchange property with other county waterworks
districts without public notice. SB 113 allows county
waterworks districts to sell, exchange, or lease property
and property interests with overlapping public agencies.
c) Without public notice, a county waterworks district's
board can sell or lease property that's worth $100 or less.
For property worth more than $100, the county waterworks
district's board must post public notices before it sells
or leases the property to the highest bidder. SB 113
increases the statutory threshold that triggers public
bidding from $100 to $5,000. SB 113 allows county
waterworks districts to exchange property and property
interests with these procedures.
39)North Delta Water Agency's assessments . Formed in 1973 as
one of the three successors to the Delta Water Agency, the
North Delta Water Agency (NDWA) operates under its own special
act. The NDWA's 1981 contract with the State Department of
Water Resources (DWR) requires NDWA to pay DWR for deliveries
from the State Water Project. To make these payments, NDWA
collects an annual uniform assessment on each acre within
NDWA. When NDWA's board of directors started to consider an
increase to the annual assessment, NDWA's staff noted that the
1980 statute does not meet the constitutional requirements of
Proposition 218 and its implementing statutes. NDWA wants the
Legislature to revise its principal act to meet current
standards. SB 113:
a) Requires NDWA to follow the constitutional and statutory
procedures used by other local governments when levying
special benefit assessments;
b) Repeals and amends the outdated provisions of the North
Delta Water Agency Act for collecting assessments;
c) Allows NDWA to use validation suits to confirm its
actions;
d) Repeals and amends the outdated provisions for NDWA's
dissolution; and,
SB 113
Page 28
e) Revises NDWA's general powers.
40)Legislative declarations . SB 113 expresses the Legislature's
intent to cut costs by combining several noncontroversial
items relating to local government into a single bill.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Each year local officials discover problems with the state
statutes that affect counties, cities, special districts, and
redevelopment agencies, as well as the laws on land use
planning and development. The Senate Local Government
Committee believes that these minor problems do not warrant
separate (and expensive) bills. According to the Legislative
Analyst, in 2001-02 the cost of producing a bill was $17,890.
2)The Senate Local Government Committee responds by combining
several of these minor topics into an annual "omnibus bill."
For example, SB 1124, Chapter 709, Statutes of 2008, was the
Committee's annual omnibus bill, which contained 15
noncontroversial statutory changes, avoiding nearly $400,000
in legislative costs. Although this practice may violate a
strict interpretation of the single-subject rule expressed in
Harbor v. Deukmejian (1987) 43 Cal. 3d 1078, and Californians
for an Open Primary v. McPherson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 735, the
Senate Local Government Committee believes it is an
expeditious and relatively inexpensive way to respond to
multiple requests.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
Association of CA Water Agencies
Butte County Air Quality Management District
CA Association of County Treasurers and Tax Collectors
CA Association of LAFCOs
SB 113
Page 29
CA Association of Public Cemeteries
CA Special Districts Association
CA State Association of Counties
City of Biggs
Contra Costa County Water Agency
Council of CA County Law Librarians
Counties of Amador, Los Angeles, Napa, Sonoma
Friant Water Authority
North Delta Water Agency
North Marin Water District
Orange County Public Law Library
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
San Diego LAFCO
Sempra Energy
Sonoma LAFCO
State Controller John Chiang
State Treasurer Bill Lockyer
University of CA
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958