HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04231996 - C41 6
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
5 FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR o f 's Costa
.:;: :-:.- ,..o= County
DATE: April 17, 1996 7��r�a coue�
SUBJECT: OPPOSITION TO AB 2846 (SWEENEY) RE COUNTY APPROVAL OF
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF A CITY
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT a position in OPPOSITION to AB 2846 by Assemblyman Mike Sweeney,
which would require the county and a city to enter into a sphere of influence
agreement before the county could approve development within the city's sphere of
influence.
BACKGROUND:
Current law requires LAFCO to adopt a sphere of influence for each local agency,
including a city, with respect to the probable physical boundaries and service area
of that agency. AB 2846 has been introduced by Assemblyman Sweeney. As
introduced, AB 2846 would require a city and the county to adopt a valid sphere of
influence agreement prior to the approval of a development project within the city's
sphere of influence. The agreement would have to contain specified elements. Any
development approved within a city's sphere of influence would have to be
consistent with the terms of the agreement. AB 2846 also increases from 30 days
to 90 days the period of time within which a property tax exchange agreement would
have to be negotiated whenever there is a change in the service area obligations
resulting from the jurisdictional change.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): e—la" ze �& 5;v�
ACTION OF BOARD ON APO 23, 1996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the County Administrator and the
Community Development Director are REQUESTED to provide more
infowmation and input solicited from the Planning Commission and
the Contra Costa County. Mayors ' Conference to the Board of Supervisors
at the May 7, 1996 , Board meeting prior to the Board taking a position
AB 2846 (SH-eeney) .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: 1,4,5 ;and 2 NOES. 3 AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED April 2 3 1996
Contact: PHIL BATC ELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD
cc: ER SAND COUNTY AD INIST ATOR,
See Page 2 '
BY P
The Director of the Growth Management and Economic Development Agency
recommends that the Board of Supervisors oppose AB 2846. His comments are as
follows:
The Board of Supervisors should oppose this bill because it will change the balance
of relations between cities and counties without consideration of the fiscal impacts
of this action. It will create a chain of events that will further reduce the ability of
counties to consider strategic options. It will have a negative affect on expanding
spheres of influence for communities which are very important to them because of
the future restrictions placed on development. The legislation needs to be viewed
in terms of its numerous implications before it is passed.
In opposing the bill, the California State Association of Counties commented:
"This bill represents a major intrusion into county land-use authority, with the
potential to greatly impair a county's ability to ensure that revenues are adequate to
meet countywide service responsibilities. No new development could take place
without agreeing to annexation of the property by the city and allowing significant city
control over the project... . In effect, this would prohibit any development that was
not contiguous to the city and place future decisions regarding economic
development solely with cities."
For these reasons, it is recommended that the Board of Supervisors oppose AB
2846.
cc: County Administrator
Director, GMEDA
Community Development Director
The Honorable Mike Sweeney
Assemblyman, 18th District
Room 4130 State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Les Spahnn; Heim, Noack, Kelly & Spahnn
1121 L Street, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Planning Commission (via CDD)
Contra Costa County Mayors ' Conference (via Clerk of the Board)
- 2 -
California State Association of Counties
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
RECEIVED
LEGISLATIVE ACTION
s MAR 12 1996
NEEDED
March 8, 1996 OFFICE OF
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
1100 K Street
Suite 101 TO: The following County Administrative Officers:
Sacramento Susan Muranishi, Alameda Count Robert Thomas, Sacramento County
California Y
95814 4Phi1 Batchelor, Contra Costa County Michael Johnson, Solano County
Telephone Joel Heinrichs, Kern County Larry Spikes, Kings County
916.327.7500 Roy Pederson, Yolo County Stell Manfredi, Madera County
Facsimile Will Randolph, Fresno County Larry Parrish, Riverside County
916.441.5507
Sally Reed, Los Angeles County James Hlawek, San Bernardino Co
Jan Mittermeier, Orange County
FROM: DeAnn Baker
Legislative Representative
SUBJECT: COUNTY LAND USE AUTHORITY& REVENUES AT RISK
An important vote will be cast by your legislative representative in the Assembly Local
Government Committee on AB 2846, by Assembly Member Michael Sweeney. This measure is
sponsored by the League of California Cities, and is very similar to AB 1341 (Sweeney) of last
year, which narrowly failed passage in the Assembly Local Government Committee in January.
AB 2846 may be heard as early as Wednesday, March 27, 1996.
The bill would prohibit counties from approving development within the sphere of influence of a
city, unless a county has reached a new sphere of influence agreement with its' cities. This new
sphere of influence agreement outlined in the bill must be met prior to the board exercising its land
use authority. This would include agreement with cities on infrastructure to serve the project,
planning and development requirements which apply to the project, and a schedule for complying
with annexation and property tax revenue sharing agreements associated with the project. Any
project approved by the county must comply with this new sphere of influence agreement.
This is a major intrusion into county land use authority. No new development could take place
without agreeing to annexation of the property by the city, and allowing significant city control
over the project as described above.
The proponents claim counties are approving substandard development, which cities must then
accept or spend significant revenues to upgrade. They also claim that cities are at a significant
disadvantage under current law when negotiating annexation agreements.
Please take a close look at AB 2846 to determine the implications to your county. Please
personally contact your legislative representative urging them to vote against this measure.
A copy of the bill is attached for your immediate attention.
, 1
f
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1995-96 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2846
1 .
Introduced by Assembly Member Sweeney
e
February 22, 1996
r -
An act to add Section 65964 to the Government Code, and
i
to amend Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code,
1
relating to local agencies.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
. c
AB 2846, as introduced, Sweeney. Local agencies:. sphere.
of influence.
Existing law requires a county and a city to adopt general
! plans for land use and development within.their jurisdictions,
and requires the local agency formation commission to adopt
a sphere of influence for each local agency, including a city,
with respect to the probable physical boundaries and service
area of that. agency. Existing law also establishes various
conditions, and permits cities and counties to impose
x.._. r conditions in specified circumstances, upon the approval or
conditional approval of development projects:
; .. This bill would require a city and county in which that city
is. located, prior to, the approval of a development, project
within a city's sphere of influence, to adopt a valid sphere of
influence agreement, containing specified elements. This bill
would also require any development project that is approved
within a city's sphere of influence to be consistent with the
sphere of influence agreement between that city and the
county in which .that city, is located. By imposing new duties
upon cities and counties with respect to the approval of
99
+ A
AB. 2846 — 2 —
j
development agreements, this bill would impose a '
state-mandated local program.
Existing law requires those local agencies affected by a
proposed jurisdictional. change to negotiate, in accordance
with specified procedures, an exchange of property tax
revenues to reflect the changes in service area obligations that
will result from the jurisdictional change. Existing law limits
this negotiation period to no more than 30 days.
This bill would increase this 30-day limit to 90 days.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated
by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for
making that reimbursement, including the creation of a State
Mandates .Claims Fund to pay the costs of mandates that do
not exceed $1,000,000 statewide and other procedures for
claims whose statewide.costs exceed $1,000,000.
This bill would provide that. if the Commission on..State
Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by
the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made
pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 65964 is added to the
2 Government Code, to read:
3 65964. (a) Prior to the approval of a development
4 project located within a city's sphere of influence, the city
5 and county shall adopt a valid sphere of influence
6 agreement. The sphere, of influence agreement shall
7 address elements, including, but not be limited to, all of
8 _ the following:
9 (1) Services and infrastructure to be provided to the
. 10 development.
11 (2) Service and infrastructure providers.
12 (3) Planning and development requirements
13 applicable to the development.
14 (4) A schedule for complying with the Cortese-Knox
15 Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 (Division '
99
c.q/
`
— 3 — AB 2846
i
ea 1 3 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the
i 2 Government Code) for annexation of the territory to the
by a 3 city, including the requirement of Section 99 of the
ance 4 Revenue and Taxation Code that negotiations to
tax 5 determine the amounts of property tax revenues to be
that 6 exchanged be completed within 90 days.
mets ;, 7 (b) Any approved development project within the
8 city's sphere of influence shall be consistent . with the
9 sphere of influence agreement between the city and the
urse 10 county.
" .ted 11 SEC. 2. Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
for 12. is amended to read:
tate 13, 99. (a) For the "purposes of -the computations
t do 14 required by this chapter:
for 15 (1) In the case of a jurisdictional change, other than a
16 city incorporation or a formation of a district as defined
tate 17 in Section 2215, the auditor shall adjust the allocation of
i by 18 property tax revenue determined pursuant to Section 96
ade 19 or 96.1, or the annual tax increment determined pursuant
20 to Section 96.5, for local agencies whose service area or
yes. ' 21 service responsibility would be altered by the
22 jurisdictional change, as determined pursuant to
23 subdivision (b) or (c) .
ws• �., 24 (2) In the case of a city incorporation, the auditor shall
( 25 assign the allocation of property tax revenues determined
the 26 pursuant to Section 56842 of the Government Code and
27 the adjustments in tax revenues that may occur pursuant
ent 28. to Section 56845 of the Government Code to the newly
pity 29 formed city or district and shall make the adjustment as
ice 30 determined by Section 56842 in the allocation of property
call 31 tax revenue determined pursuant to Section 96 or 96.1 for
of 32 each local agency whose service area or service
l\ 33 responsibilities would be altered by the incorporation.
-he 34 (3) In the case of a formation of a district as defined in
35 Section 2215, the auditor shall assign .the allocation of
36 propertytax revenues determined pursuant to Section
ats 37 56842 of the Government Code to the district and shall
38 make the adjustment as determined by Section 56842 in
pox 39 the allocation of property tax revenue determined
on �: 40 pursuant to Section 96 or 96.1 for.each local agency whose
99 99
�I I
AB 2846 — 4 —
I
4 -
1 service area or service responsibilities would be altered .'
2 by the formation.
3 (b) Upon the filing of an application or a resolution
4 pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Local Government
5 Reorganization- Act of 1985 (Division 3 (commencing
6 with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the Government Code) , i
7 but prior to the issuance of a certificate of filing, the
8 executive officer shall give notice of the filing to the
9 assessor and auditor of each county within which the
10 territory subject to the jurisdictional change is located.
11 This notice shall specify each local agency whose service
12 area or responsibility will be altered by-the jurisdictional
. 13 change.
14 (1) (A) The county assessor shall provide to the
15 county auditor, within 30 days of the notice of filing, a
16 report which identifies the 'assessed valuations for the
17 territory subject to the jurisdictional change and the tax
18 rate area or areas in which the territory exists.
19 (B) The auditor shall estimate the amount of property
.r
20 tax revenue generated within the territory that is the
21 . subject of the jurisdictional change during the current
.22 fiscal year.
23. (2) The auditor shall estimate what proportion of the
24 property tax revenue determined pursuant to paragraph r
25 (1) is attributable to each local agency pursuant to
26 Section 96.1 and Section 96.5.
27 (3) Within 45 days of notice of the filing of an
28 application or resolution, the auditor shall notify the
29 governing body of each local agency whose service area
30 'or service responsibility will be altered by the amount of,
31 and allocation factors with respect to, property tax
32 revenue estimated pursuant to paragraph .(2) that is
33 subject to a negotiated exchange.
34 (4) Upon receipt of the estimates pursuant to
35 paragraph (3) the local agencies shall commence
36 negotiations to determine the amount of property tax
37 revenues to be exchanged between and among' the local
38 agencies. This negotiation period shall not exceed 30 90
39 days.
99
i
qi
— 5 — AB 2846
altered 1 The exchange may be limited to an exchange of
.2 property tax revenues from the annual tax increment
Aution 3 generated in the area subject to the jurisdictional change
ament 4 and attributable to the local agencies whose service area
-Incing 5 or service responsibilities will be altered by the proposed
erode) - 6 jurisdictional change. The final exchange resolution shall
g, the 7 specify how the annual tax increment shall be allocated
to the 8 in future years.
!h the 9 (5) In the event that a jurisdictional change would
sated. 10 affect the service area or service responsibility of one or
.-rvice 11. more special districts, the board of supervisors of the
lional 12. county or counties in which the districts are located shall,
13 on behalf of the district or districts, negotiate any
o the .14 exchange of property tax revenues.
ing; a 15 (6) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
)r the 16 executive .officer. shall not issue a certificate of filing
;-ie tax 17 pursuant to Section 56828 of the Government Code until
18 the local agencies included in the property tax revenue
�perty 19 exchange negotiation, within the 88/dfty 90-day
is the 29 'n'egotiation period, present resolutions adopted by each
irrent 21 . sccounty and city whereby each, county and city
22 .agrees to accept the exchange of property tax revenues.
)f the 23 . (7). In the event that the commission modifies the
;raph24 . proposal or its resolution of determination; any local
( 0 !
nt to 0 25 'agency whose service area or service responsibility would
26 be altered by the ,proposed jurisdictional change may
)f an 27 request, and the executive officer shall grant, 15 days for
y the 28 the affected. agencies, pursuant to paragraph (4) to
area 29 renegotiate an exchange of property tax revenues.
nt of, 30 Notwithstanding the time period specified in paragraph
y tax 31 (4) , if the resolutions required pursuant to paragraph (6)
lat is 32 are not presented to the executive officer within the
33 .15-day period, all proceedings of the jurisdictional change
Ato 34 shallautomatically be terminated.
.ence 3.5 (8) No later than the date on which the certificate o�
Y tax .36 completion of the jurisdictional change is recorded with
local 37 the county recorder., the executive officer shall notify the
3090 38. auditor or ..auditors of the exchange of property tax
39 revenues and the auditor or auditors shall make the
40, appropriate ad ustments as provided in subdivision a
99 99
AB 2846 — 6 —
I
6 -
1 (c) Whenever a jurisdictional change is not required,
2 to be reviewed and approved by a local agency formation
3 commission, the local agencies whose service area or
4 service responsibilities would be altered by the proposed
5 change, shall' ' give notice to the State Board of
6 Equalization and the assessor and auditor of each county
7 within which the territory subject to the jurisdictional
8 change is located. This notice shall specify each local
9 agency whose service area or responsibility will be
10 altered by the jurisdictional change and request the
11 auditor and assessor to make the determinations required
12 . pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) .
13 Upon notification by the auditor of the amount of, 'and
14 allocation factors with respect to, property tax subject to
15 exchange, the local agencies, pursuant to the provisions
16 of paragraphs (4) , (5) , and (6) of subdivision (b) , shall
17 determine the amount of property 'tax revenues to be
18 exchanged between and among the local agencies.
19 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no such
20 jurisdictional change..shall become effective until each.
21 county and city included in these negotiations agrees, by
22 resolution, to accept the negotiated exchange of property
23 tax revenues. The exchange may be limited to an
24 exchange of property tax- revenue from the annual tax i f
25 increment generated in the area subject to the �-
26 jurisdictional change and attributable. to the local
27 agencies whose service area or service responsibilities
28 will be altered by the proposed jurisdictional change. The i
< 29 final exchange resolution shall specify how the annual tax
30 increment shall be allocated in future years. Upon the
31 adoption of the resolutions required pursuant to this
32 section, the adopting agencies shall notify ,the auditor
33 who shall make the appropriate adjustments as provided
34 in subdivision (a) .
35 (d) With respect to adjustments in the allocation -of
36 property taxes pursuant.to this section, a county and any
37 local agency or agencies within the county may develop
38 and adopt a master property tax transfer agreement. The
39 agreement may be revised from time to time by, the f ^
40 parties subject to the agreement.
99
- 7 — AB 2846
equired. 1 (e) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (f) ,
rmation 2 for the purpose of determining. the amount of property
area or 3 tax to be allocated in the 1979-80 fiscal year and each fiscal
`oposed 4 year thereafter for those local agencies that were affected
►ard of 5 by a jurisdictional change which was filed with the State
county 6 Board of Equalization after January 1, 1978, but on or
ictional ` ' ® 7 before January 1, 1979. The local agencies shall determine
!h local 8 by resolution the amount of property tax revenues to be
will be 9 exchanged between and among the. affected agencies
est the 10 and notify the auditor of-the determination.
-1quired 11 (f) For .the purpose of determining the amount of
on (b) . 12 property tax to,be allocated in the 1979-80 fiscal year and
of and 13 each fiscal year thereafter, for a city incorporation that
'�'Ject to 114 -was filed pursuant to Sections 54900 to 54904 after January
visions 15 1, 1978; but on or before January 1, 1979,; the amount of
1) , shall 16 property tax revenue considered to have been received
s to be 17 by the jurisdiction for the 1978-79 fiscal year shall be
..encies. 18 equal to two-thirds of the amount of property tax revenue
.o such 19 projected in the final local agency formation commission
-il each ® 20 staff report pertaining to the incorporation multiplied by
-ees, by 21 the proportion that the total amount of property tax
-operty 22 revenue received by all jurisdictions within the county
to an 23 for I the 1978-79 fiscal year bears to the total amount of
ual tax 24 property tax revenue received by all jurisdictions within
to the ® 25 the county for the 1977-78 fiscal year. Except, however,
local 26 in the event that the final commission report did not
abilities 27 specify the amount of property tax revenue projected for
;e. The 28 that incorporation, the commission shall by October 10,
Dual tax 29 determine pursuant to Section 54790.3 of the
on the 30 Government Code the amount of property tax to be
to this 31 transferred to the city.
tuditor 32. The provisions of this subdivision shall also apply to the
ovided r 0 33, allocation of property taxes for the 1980-81 fiscal year and
34 each fiscal year thereafter for incorporations approved by
tion 'of 35 the voters in June 1979.
nd any 36 (g) For the purpose of the computations made
evelop 37 pursuant to this section, in the case of a district formation
it. The 38 that was filed pursuant to Sections 54900 to 54904,
by the 39 inclusive, of the Government Code after January 1978,
0 40 but before January 1, 1979, the amount of property tax to
99 99
f
AB 2846 — 8 —
I
81 be allocated to the district for the 1979-80 fiscal year and
2 ' each fiscal year thereafter shall be determined pursuant ,
3 to Section 54790.3 of the. Government Code.
4 (h) For the purposes of the computations required by
5 this chapter, in the case of a jurisdictional change, other
6 than a change requiring an adjustment by the .auditor
7 pursuant to subdivision (a) , the auditor shall adjust the i
8 allocation of property tax revenue determined pursuant
{ 9 to Section 96 or 96.1 or its predecessor section, or the
10 annual tax increment determined pursuant to Section
11 96.5 or its predecessor section, for each local school
12 district, community . college district, or county
13 superintendent of schools whose service area or .service
14 responsibility would be altered by the . jurisdictional
15 change, as determined as follows:
16 (1) The governing body of each district, county j
17 superintendent of schools, or county whose service areas
18. or service responsibilities would be altered by the change
19- shall determine the amount of property tax revenues to
20 be exchanged between and among the affected
21 jurisdictions. This determination shall be adopted by each
22 "affected jurisdiction by: resolution. For 'the purpose of
23 negotiation, the county auditor shall furnish the parties
24 and the county board of education with an estimate of the
. 25 property tax revenue subject to negotiation.
26 (2) In the event that the affected jurisdictions are
27 unable to agree, within 60 days after the effective date of
28 the jurisdictional change, and if all the jurisdictions are
29 wholly within one county,the county board of education
30 shall,by resolution, determine the amount of property tax
.31 . revenue to be exchanged. If the jurisdictions are in more
32 ' than one county, the State Board of Education shall, by
33 resolution, within 60 days after the effective date of the
34 jurisdictional change, determine the amount of property -�
35 tax to be exchanged.
36 (3) Upon adoption of any resolution pursuant to this
37 .subdivision, the adopting jurisdictions or State Board of
38 Education shall notify the county auditor who shall make
39 the appropriate adjustments as provided in subdivision r.
40 (a) . t .
99
- 9 — A B 2846
(i) For purposes of subdivision (h) , the annexation by
i ,and t 2 a community college district of territory within a county
3 not previously served by a community college district is
,ed by 4 an alteration of service area. The community college
' other 5 district and the county shall negotiate the amount, if any,
editor 6 of property tax revenues to be exchanged. In these
7 negotiations, there shall be taken into consideration the
st the
st theant 8 amount of revenue received from the timber yield tax
-sthe 9 and forest reserve receipts by the community college
-ction 10 district in the area not previously served. In no event shall
>chool 11 the property tax revenue to be exchanged exceed the
ounty 12 amount of property tax revenue collected prior to the
7rvice 13 annexation for the purposes of paying tuition expenses of
tional 14 residents enrolled in the community college district,
15 adjusted each year by the percentage change in
ounty ,, 16 population and the percentage change in the cost of
areas 17 living, or per capita personal income, whichever is lower,
.xange 18 less the amount of revenue received by the community
aes to 19 college district in the annexed area from the timber yield
'ected 20 tax and forest reserve receipts.
each
21 (j) At any time after a jurisdictional change is
)se of 22 effective, any of the local agencies party to the agreement
,arties 23 to exchange property tax revenue may renegotiate the
of the 24 agreement with respect to the current fiscal year or
25 subsequent fiscal years, subject to approval by all local
is are 26 agencies affected by the renegotiation.
ate of 27 SEC. 3. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the
is are 28 Government Code, if the Commission on State Mandates
�ation 29 determines that this act contains costs mandated by the
-ty tax 30 state, reimbursement to local agencies and school
more 31 districts for those .costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7
ill, by 32 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title
7f the 33 2 of the Government Code. If the statewide cost of the
ert 34 claim for reimbursement does not exceed one million
p y 35 dollars ($1,000,000) , reimbursement shall be made from
o this 36 the State Mandates Claims Fund.
lyd of 37 'Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Government
make 38 Code, unless otherwise specified, the provisions of this act
vision
l
99 99
,
AB 2846 — lo —
1 shall become operative on the same date that the act
2 takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution.
i
i
1
t
0
99