BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 244
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 17, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 244 (Wolk) - As Amended: August 15, 2011
Policy Committee: Housing and
Community Development Vote: 7-0
Local Government 6-3
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires cities, counties and local agency formation
commissions (LAFCOs) to analyze infrastructure deficiencies in
unincorporated disadvantaged communities. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Prohibits a LAFCO from approving an annexation to a city of
territory, as specified, where there exists a disadvantaged
unincorporated community that is contiguous to the area of
proposed annexation, unless an application to annex the
disadvantaged unincorporated community to the subject city has
been filed with the LAFCO.
2)Requires, upon the next update of a sphere of influence that
occurs on or after July 1, 2012, the inclusion of the need for
public facilities and services of any disadvantaged inhabited
communities within or contiguous to the existing or proposed
sphere of influence of the city or special district.
3)Allows the LAFCO to assess the feasibility of governmental
reorganization of particular agencies and recommend
reorganization of those agencies when reorganization is found
to be feasible and if reorganization will further the goals of
orderly development and efficient and affordable service
delivery.
4)Requires, before the next revision of its housing element, a
city or county to review and update the land use element of
its general plan to include a description of each
unincorporated island, fringe community, or legacy community
SB 244
Page 2
and an analysis, based on available data, of water,
wastewater, stormwater drainage and structural fire protection
needs.
5)Provides that no reimbursement is required because local
agencies have the authority to levy service charges, fees or
assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of
service mandated by the bill's provisions.
FISCAL EFFECT
This bill has a negligible state fiscal impact. There would be
significant local planning costs, but these are not a state
mandated local program and would not be reimbursable.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . According to the author, many disadvantaged
unincorporated communities lack public services and even
public facilities like domestic water, sanitary sewers, paved
streets, storm drains, and street lights, and some cities and
special districts are reluctant to annex these areas. The
author states the bill will require local officials to include
disadvantaged unincorporated communities in their long-range
planning for land use and public facilities. The author notes
that SB 244 takes a two-pronged approach to bringing more
attention to disadvantaged unincorporated communities in the
planning process. First, the bill requires LAFCOs to consider
these types of communities in both their sphere of influence
updates, starting after July 1, 2012. Second, the bill
requires cities and counties to include information about
disadvantaged unincorporated communities in their general
plans.
2)Background. The Department of Finance says that 159 census
designated places (CDPs) had 2005-09 household median incomes
less than 80% of the statewide household median income. CDPs
are named places with a concentration of residents, housing,
and commercial activity, but located in a county's
unincorporated territory. Some of these disadvantaged
unincorporated communities are county islands (mostly
surrounded by cities), some are fringe communities (at or near
SB 244
Page 3
the edge of cities), and others are legacy communities
(geographically isolated). The bill may describe these
communities as disadvantaged, but some residents actually
prefer the more rural nature of their community's environment.
Not all disadvantaged communities wish to be part of a city
or desire to receive additional services beyond what they
already have.
3)LAFCO. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act creates a LAFCO in each
county to control the boundaries of cities and most special
districts. The courts repeatedly refer to LAFCOs as the
Legislature's watchdog over boundary changes. A LAFCO must
determine a sphere of influence for every local government
agency within its county and must review and update the
spheres as necessary every five years. In addition, any
person or local agency may apply to LAFCO to update a sphere
of influence at any time. A LAFCO's boundary decisions must
be consistent with the spheres of influence of affected cities
and special districts. Bringing territory into a sphere is
generally considered to be a precursor to annexation.
In determining a new or amended sphere of influence, the LAFCO
must hold a public hearing and must prepare a statement of its
determinations with respect to the present and planned land
uses in the area; the present and probable needs for public
facilities in the area; the present capacity of public
facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency
provides or is authorized to provide; and the existence of any
social or economic communities of interest in the area, if
relevant.
4)Local planning . Every county and city must adopt a general
plan with seven mandatory elements: land use, circulation,
housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. Except
for the housing elements, the Planning and Zoning Law does not
require counties and cities to regularly revise their general
plans. Cities and counties' major land use
decisions-subdivisions, zoning, public works projects, use
permits-must be consistent with their general plans.
Development decisions must carry out and not obstruct a
general plan's policies. Because the general plan is a
long-range planning document, in preparing these documents
cities typically plan for their entire sphere of influence
rather than just their current physical boundaries.
SB 244
Page 4
5)Previous legislation . SB 1174 (Wolk, 2010) concentrated on
local general plans; the bill was held on this committee's
Suspense File. AB 853 (Arambula), 2010, focused on LAFCO
municipal service reviews, spheres of influence and city
annexation procedures; Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill
as unnecessary.
SB 194 (Florez), 2010, looked at disadvantaged communities'
needs for public works funding; Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed
the bill as unnecessary.
6)Support . The sponsor of the bill, the California Rural Legal
Assistance Foundation, argues that disadvantaged
unincorporated communities "are systematically underserved in
the overall allocation of public resources and are frequently
left out of local planning processes?this neglect and
deprivation prevents these neighborhoods from realizing their
potential as livable and economically viable communities."
Supporters further argue that few local government land use
plans focus on the existence of disadvantaged unincorporated
communities, much less how to solve their many challenges.
This bill will result in greater awareness of these
communities and their needs in local government plans.
7)Opposition . The League of California Cities believes local
agencies do not have the legal authority to impose fees to
recover the costs of the new duties mandated in the bill. The
bill's provisions right now include a fee disclaimer that says
that "no reimbursement is required by this act?.because a
local agency has the authority to levy service charges, fees
or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of
service mandated by this act." The League is concerned that
cities, under the rules dictated by Proposition 26, cannot
charge current residents of the city for the costs associated
with the considerable analysis required by the bill's
provisions since the residents of the city are not being
provided a service.
The County of Los Angeles opposes this bill because it is
both costly and burdensome. They argue they already have a
long term plan for all unincorporated areas and that the bill
does not adequately address the fiscal strains the bill would
place on already distressed counties, cities, communities and
taxpayers.
SB 244
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081