BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 244|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 244
Author: Wolk (D), et al
Amended: 5/18/11
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 6-3, 4/27/11
AYES: Wolk, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Liu
NOES: Huff, Fuller, La Malfa
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-3, 5/16/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Emmerson, Runner
SUBJECT : Land use: general plan: disadvantaged
unincorporated
communities
SOURCE : California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Policy Link
DIGEST : This bill requires local agencies to plan for
specified disadvantaged communities through the Local
Agency Formation Commission planning process and general
plan updates.
ANALYSIS : The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act creates a Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in each county to
control the boundaries of cities and most special
districts. To plan for the future boundaries and service
areas of the cities and special districts, the LAFCO
CONTINUED
SB 244
Page
2
prepares a municipal service reviews for each entity and
use the information to adopt a sphere of influence for each
city and special district every five years. Boundary
decisions by the LAFCOs must be consistent with the spheres
of influence of the affected cities or districts. Many
disadvantaged unincorporated communities, such as county
islands, fringe communities, and isolated inhabited
communities, lack many basic public services, such as
domestic water, sanitary sewers, paved streets, storm
drains, and street lights. With respect to the LAFCO
process, this bill:
Defines a "disadvantaged inhabited community" as
inhabited area that is all or a portion of a community
in which the median household income is less than 80
percent of the statewide average, as specified.
Requires a LAFCO, when preparing municipal service
reviews, to include a written statement determining
the location and characteristics of any disadvantaged
inhabited community, including specified
infrastructure needs and deficiencies in disadvantaged
inhabited communities within or adjacent to a sphere
of influence.
Requires a LAFCO, when reviewing and updating a
city or special district sphere of influence that
occurs after July 1, 2012, to include the present and
probable needs for public facilities and services of
disadvantaged inhabited communities. This would apply
to the sphere of influence of a city or special
district that provides sewer, municipal and industrial
water, or structural fire protection services or
facilities.
Requires a LAFCO to assess various alternatives,
including consolidation of governmental agencies, for
improving infrastructure and services within or
adjacent to a sphere of influence.
Under current law, cities and counties are required to
adopt general plans that incorporate seven mandated
elements land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open
space, noise, and safety. The only element of a general
plan that must be regularly updated is the housing element;
a total of 478 cities and 58 counties must submit housing
elements to the state once every five years, or an average
CONTINUED
SB 244
Page
3
of 107 per year. Major land use decisions must be
consistent with a city or county's general plan.
This bill requires cities and counties, upon the next
general plan revision and any subsequent housing element
update, to review and update elements of the general plan
to include data and analysis, goals, policies, and
implementation measures to address unincorporated island,
fringe, or legacy communities. Updated plans include:
Identification and mapping of each unincorporated
island or fringe community located within or adjacent
to a city, and each legacy community located in a
county.
Quantification and analysis of seven specified
conditions regarding deficient services, facilities,
and housing conditions.
Analysis of current programs and activities that
address those conditions, and an evaluation of the
feasibility of annexation of identified island or
fringe communities.
A statement of specific, quantified goals for
eliminating or reducing those conditions, and feasible
implementation measures to achieve these goals,
including an identification of resources and
timelines.
Comments
The U.S. Census Bureau identifies a "census designated
place" (CDP) as the statistical counterpart of a city in
that it is a named place with a concentration of residents,
housing, and commercial activity, but located in a county's
unincorporated territory. The 2000 Census identified 583
census designated places in California. The Department of
Finance says that 159 of those CDPs had 2005-09 household
median incomes that were less than 80 percent of the
statewide household median income. The 2010 Census
identified 1,043 CDPs in California and when fresh income
data become available in late 2011, many of them will be
considered disadvantaged.
Some of these disadvantaged unincorporated communities are
county islands (mostly surrounded by cities), some are
fringe communities (at or near the edge of cities), and
CONTINUED
SB 244
Page
4
others are legacy communities (geographically isolated).
Proposition 84 (2006) authorized $5.4 billion in state
bonds and specifically set aside $90 million for "planning
grants and planning incentives." The Strategic Growth
Council manages these programs (SB 732 �Steinberg], Chapter
729, Statutes of 2008). The Council has awarded $26
million in planning grants. Concerned about the inequities
faced by disadvantaged communities, the Council will
prioritize 20 percent of each year's planning grants for
work that benefits economically disadvantaged communities.
Many disadvantaged unincorporated communities lack public
services and even public facilities like domestic water,
sanitary sewers, paved streets, storm drains, and street
lights. Some cities and special districts are reluctant to
annex these areas. Advocates want legislators to require
local officials to include disadvantaged communities in
their long-range planning for land use and public
facilities.
Prior Legislation
SB 1174 (Wolk), of 2010 concentrated on local general
plans; the bill died on the Assembly Appropriations
Committee's suspense file.
AB 853 (Arambula), of 2010 focused on the LAFCOs' municipal
service reviews, spheres of influence, and city annexation
procedures; Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill as
"unnecessary."
SB 194 (Florez), of 2010 looked at disadvantaged
communities' needs for public works funding; Governor
Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill as "unnecessary."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13
2013-14 Fund
CONTINUED
SB 244
Page
5
Local planning mandate
significant local costs, not reimbursable
Local
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/18/11)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (co-source)
Policy Link (co-source)
California Coalition for Rural Housing
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
Catholic Charities-Diocese of Stockton
Clean Water Action California
Committee for a Better Seville
Community Water Center
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
Food and Water Watch
Having Our Say
Natural Resources Defense Council
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Club-California
Southern California Watershed Alliance
Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry Network
California
United for Change in Tooleville
Urban Habitat
Urban Semillas
Winnemem Winte Tribe-Middle River People
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/18/11)
American Planning Association-California Chapter
California Association of Local Agency Formation
Commissions
California State Association of Counties
County of Los Angeles
Cucamonga Valley Water District
League of California Cities
Regional Council of Rural Counties
San Diego LAFCO
AGB:do 5/18/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
CONTINUED
SB 244
Page
6
**** END ****
CONTINUED