HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08011989 - 1.37 /xry
1-03'7
TO: r• BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator %%"�` � '~ Contra
A
Costa
DATE: July 24, 1989 � Y- -`•��°
�.. County
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: AB 1654 (Costa)
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)d BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a position of SUPPORT IF AMENDED in regard to AB 1654 by Assemblyman
Costa which currently requires a local agency to which property is
dedicated for certain purposes to record a certificate stating that the
local agency will reconvey the property to the subdivider if the local
agency makes a determination that the same purpose for which the property
was dedicated does not exist, except for dedications for open space, parks
or schools and allows the subdivider to request the local agency to make
the determination that the same public purpose for which the property was
dedicated still exists and to reconvey the dedicated property if the same
purpose does not exist.
BACKGROUND:
Under current law a local agency may, by ordinance, require a subdivider to
dedicate property for public purposes as a condition of receiving approval
for a subdivision map. Assemblyman Costa has introduced AB 1654 which
would require the local agency to record a certificate with the county
recorder stating that the local agency will reconvey the property to the
subdivider if the local agency makes a determination that the same public
purpose for which the land was dedicated does not exist at the time the
local agency decided to use the dedicated property. This requirement would
be effective with all property required to be dedicated on or after January
1, 1990 . -
The
990 . -The Public Works Department notes that they have no problem with the intent
of the bill as they understand it to be, which is that lands dedicated for
a specific purpose be used by the local agency only for that purpose.
However, they note that requiring a recorded certificate of use is a
burdensome administrative procedure which they believe is unnecessary.
Public Works points out that if the intended use is specified in the
�j y']TC��final dedication document it becomes a part the official records when
CON nVUED ON ATTACHMENT: yL....YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ._,._RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE S ////_OTHER ///�
SIGNATURELS]; C/�� - i{�1"�-,1�-.e �i��C�/vC
ACTION OF BOARD ON _
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: _ AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: ,,, _ z_ ATTESTED AUG 1 1989
PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
S7Uf!PEEERVISOR�SryAND
j►COUNTY
�ADMINISTRATOR
M382 (10188) BY � 4�wii'f/YG.zo
DEPUTY
the map or document is recorded. They question the value of then requiring
that the local agency will promise to follow state law. In addition,
Public Works points out that most dedications are accepted for "recording
purposes only" . The intended use of the right of way may not occur for
several years . It is not clear what responsibility or liability the local
agency may assume by accepting a dedication for recording purposes only and
then being asked to sign and record a certificate which specifies that the
dedicated property will be reconveyed if the original purpose of the
dedication does not exist at the time the local agency decides to use the
dedicated property.
The Public Works Department would prefer that the bill simply state that
all documents "dedicating" land or "offering for dedication" land to a
government entity shall specify the purpose or purposes for which the
government entity may use the dedicated property. If this amendment were
acceptable to the author the Public Works Department would recommend that
the Board of Supervisors support AB 1654 .
This office agrees that AB 1654 as amended June 1, 1989 fails to really
achieve its intended purpose and instead imposes unnecessary administrative
burdens on a local agency. It is therefore recommended that the Board
assume a support .if amended position on AB 1654 and authorize the County
Administrator to .seek amendments to AB 1654 which are acceptable to the
Public Works Director and County Counsel .
AB 1654 passed the Assembly June 8, 1989 by a vote of 74 : 0 and is currently
on referral to the Senate Committee on Housing and Urban Affairs .
cc: County Administrator
Public Works Director
Deputy Public Works Director-Flood Control
County Counsel
Assemblyman Jim Costa
Senator Leroy Greene, Chairman
Senate Housing & Urban Affairs Committee
CSAC
Les Spahnn, ;SRJ. Jackson, Barish & Associates