BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 536|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 536
Author: Berryhill (R)
Amended: 5/1/13
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/8/13
AYES: Wolk, Knight, Beall, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Hernandez, Liu
SUBJECT : Property-related services
SOURCE : Madera County Board of Supervisors
DIGEST : This bill states that a county does not need to
provide subsidies to cure service deficiencies in a
county-dependent district if the district's voters reject or
reduce a property-related fee, as specified.
ANALYSIS : The California Constitution (Cal. Const.) defines a
property-related fee or charge as any levy other than an ad
valorem tax, a special tax, or an assessment, imposed by an
agency upon a parcel or upon a person as an incident of property
ownership, including a user fee or charge for a property-related
service.
Before a local government can charge a new property-related fee,
or increase an existing fee, Proposition 218 requires local
officials to:
Identify the parcels to be charged,
Calculate the fee for each parcel,
CONTINUED
SB 536
Page
2
Notify the parcels' owners in writing about the fees and the
hearing,
Hold a public hearing to consider and count protests, and
Abandon the fees if a majority of the parcels' owners protest.
New or increased property-related fees also require:
A majority-vote of the affected property owners, or
Two-thirds registered voter approval, or
Weighted ballot approval by the affected property owners.
However, this election requirement does not apply to
property-related fees for sewer, water, or refuse collection
services.
This bill states that a county is not obligated to provide
subsidies to cure deficiencies in funding for property-related
services provided in a district if any of the following apply:
The district's governing board proposed to impose, extend, or
increase property related fees or charges for the services,
the board fully complied with Section 6 of Article XIII D of
the Cal. Const., and a majority of parcel owners submit a
written protest against the proposed imposition, extension, or
increase, pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 6 of Article
XIII D of the Cal. Const.
The district's governing board proposed to impose, extend, or
increase property related fees or charges for the services,
the board fully complied with Section 6 of Article XIII D of
the Cal. Const., and the proposed imposition, extension, or
increase failed to get voter approval pursuant to subdivision
(c) of Section 6 of Article XIII D of the Cal. Const.
Property related fees or charges for the services that fully
complied with Section 6 of Article XIII D of the Cal. Const.
were reduced or repealed by the voters by an initiative
pursuant to Section 3 of Article XIII C of the Cal. Const.
This bill's provisions do not apply if the board of supervisors
undertook the obligation to subsidize the services before the
completion of a majority protest proceeding or election.
This bill defines a "district" as a local governmental entity
CONTINUED
SB 536
Page
3
created for the purpose of providing sidewalks, streets, sewers,
water, flood control, drainage systems, or vector control
services within its jurisdiction with a governing board that has
the same members as the board of supervisors for the county in
the overlapping geographical area.
This bill states that "fully complied with Section 6 of Article
XIII D of the California Constitution" means all of the
following:
Revenues derived from the proposed fee or charge do not exceed
the funds required to provide the property-related service.
Revenues derived from the fee or charge are not used for any
purpose other than that for which the fee or charge was
imposed.
The amount of the fee or charge imposed on any parcel or
person as an incident of property ownership does not exceed
the proportional cost of the service attributable to the
parcel or person.
The fee or charge is not imposed for a service unless and
until that service is actually used by, or immediately
available to, the property owner in question.
The fee or charge is not imposed for general government
services if the service is available to the public at large in
substantially the same manner it is to property owners.
The district has identified all parcels upon which the fee or
charge is proposed and calculated the amount of the fee or
charge to be imposed upon each identified parcel.
The district has provided a written notice by mail of the
proposed fee or charge to the record owner of each identified
parcel, in conformance with subdivision (c) of Section 6 of
Article XIII D of the Cal. Const., and provided for all
required hearings.
Comments
According to the Senate Governance and Finance Committee
analysis, when property owners or voters reject or reduce
CONTINUED
SB 536
Page
4
property-related fees, local agencies are left without any good
options for continuing the projects or services funded by those
fees, including water, sewer, and refuse collection services.
If property-related fee revenues are insufficient to cover a
local agency's maintenance and operations costs for providing a
service, it may have to reduce the level of service provided.
If reduced service levels would pose a risk to public health or
safety, the agency may be forced to use general tax revenues to
pay for the operations and maintenance costs of those services.
Many local governments' general fund revenues are already
stretched too thin to provide core services that benefit all
local taxpayers. Property owners should not expect local
governments to use scarce general tax revenues to subsidize the
costs of projects or services that benefit only specific
properties. This bill clarifies that local governments are not
obligated to provide subsidies.
Related legislation . This bill is nearly identical to SB 1120
(Berryhill, 2012), which died on the Senate Floor.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/9/13)
Madera County Board of Supervisors (source)
Rural County Representatives of California
AB:nk 5/10/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED