BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
BILL NO: AB 1430 HEARING: 6/29/11
AUTHOR: Local Government Committee FISCAL: No
VERSION: 6/22/11 TAX LEVY: No
CONSULTANT: Detwiler
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSIONS
Clarifies and revises the state law governing local agency
formation commissions.
Background and Existing Law
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
improvements. The Assembly Local Government Committee
responds by authoring annual clean-up bills. Last year's
LAFCO clean-up bill was AB 2795 (Assembly Local Government
Committee, 2010). This year, the practitioners reviewed
the Act's definitions and recommended improvements.
Proposed Law
I. Definitions . The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act
specifically defines 75 statutory terms that are essential
to using the Act's procedures. Assembly Bill 1430 amends
nearly every definition with editorial revisions,
renumbering, and reformatting changes.
II. "Dependent special district" definition . Local
officials distinguish between independent special districts
and dependent special districts, based on who governs. The
Act says that an independent special district has a
directly elected legislative body or a legislative body
with members appointed to fixed terms. Although the Act
doesn't contain a formal definition, practitioners say that
AB 1430 -- 6/22/11 -- Page 2
a dependent district depends on another legislative body
for its governance. Assembly Bill 1430 defines a
"dependent special district" as a district with a
legislative body consisting of ex officio members who are
officers of a county or other local agency, or who are
appointees of those officers for terms that are not fixed.
�See �19 of the bill.]
III. "District" definition . The Act's definition of
"district" or "special district" are in the same code
section, along with a complex list of exclusions. Although
most practitioners use these terms interchangeably, a
footnote in the 1995 Las Tunas decision treated them as
separate terms. In revising and reformatting the statutory
definition of "district" or "special district," Assembly
Bill 1430 says that the terms are synonymous. ݧ23] An
uncodified section in AB 1430 includes a statement that
this change does not affect the decision in Las Tunas Beach
Geological Hazard Abatement District v. Superior Court.
ݧ86]
IV. "District of limited powers" definition . In 1965, the
Legislature repealed the boundary change provisions of most
special districts' principal acts and instead adopted the
District Reorganization Act, one of the statutory
predecessors of the current Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act.
The District Reorganization Act ended the "doctrine of
automatic merger," in which a city simply took over a
special district once the district was entirely within the
city limits. Instead, the 1965 Act and the current Act
spell out the steps, including LAFCO review and approval,
for a district to merge with a city or become a subsidiary
district of the city. To make those procedures work, the
Legislature coined the term "district of limited powers."
Nearly a half-century later, that definition is archaic
because no one tries to invoke the defunct doctrine of
automatic merger. Local officials know that they need
LAFCO review and approval before a city can take over a
special district, either through merger or conversion to
subsidiary district status. Assembly Bill 1430 repeals the
definition of "district of limited powers" ݧ29] and
deletes the statutory references to that term. ݧ26, �73,
�79, �83, & �84]
V. "Latent service or power" definition . Although the Act
AB 1430 -- 6/22/11 -- Page 3
lacks a formal definition, practitioners usually use the
term latent power to mean the powers that a special
district's principal act authorizes, but a particular
district doesn't use. For example, the Community Services
District Law lists 32 services that a CSD could offer (SB
135, Kehoe, 2005). The Stallion Springs CSD (Kern County)
provides five services, so the 27 other statutorily
authorized but unused services are its latent powers.
Assembly Bill 1430 defines "latent service or power" as the
services authorized by a special district's principal act
but aren't being exercised, as determined by LAFCO. ݧ39]
VI. Technical amendments . In addition to its substantive
changes to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act, Assembly Bill
1430 makes editorial improvements and reformatting changes.
State Revenue Impact
No estimate.
Comment
Purpose of the bill . Even the best written statutes
contain minor flaws. 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
AB 1430 don't raise statewide policy questions. Instead,
the bill makes a complex statute easier for property
owners, residents, and local officials to use.
Assembly Actions
Assembly Local Government Committee: 9-0
Assembly Floor: 78-0
Support and Opposition (6/23/11)
Support : California Association of Local Agency Formation
Commissions.
AB 1430 -- 6/22/11 -- Page 4
Opposition : Unknown.