Loading...
Item 22 - Status of Pending Legislation AGENDA ~PORT SUMMARy[)ISTRIB~TED df42~.H9"5 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man~ - INITIATED BY: Janis Acosta, Management Analyst<=/~ DATE: April 27, 1993 SUBJECf: Status of Pending Legislation ABSTRACf The League of California Cities has brought 14 pieces of legislation to the attention of the City. The measures include: AB 8 (Connolly) Beer Keg Tagging Program; SB 695 (Leonard) Homeowners' Relief Act of 1993 pertaining to local fees and assessments; AB 267 (Statham) Vehicle and Cigarette Tax; AB 1813 (McDonald) redevelopment agency investments toward the growth of minority, women and small business enterprises; AB 2010 (Bru1te) redevelopment agency legal action restrictions; SB 450 (Dills) local authority for solid waste services; SB 552 (Hughes) minority, women, and disabled veteran business enterprise participation goals for public works projects; AB 200 (T. Friedman) prevailing wage rates; SB 1234 (Hurtt) prevailing wage companion measure to Assemblyman Goldsmith's AB 193; SB 1204 (Lewis) prevailing wage calculation; AB 11 (Eastin) recycled products; AB 1484 (Speier) and SB 1154 (Watson) emergency medical services agency; AB 1887 (Hauser) Statement of Indebtedness; AB 691 (Richter) redevelopment plan amendment notices; SCA 22 and SB 1114 (Maddy) Public ~ Safety; SB 48 (Alquist) and AB 161 (Willie Brown) Sales and Use Taxes; AB 1678 (Bowen) General Plan Compliance; AB 2286 (Pringle) Booking Fee Reform Package; and AB 981 (Hauser) Mandatory Periodic Historic Resource Survey. ENN1RO~E~AL~V1EVV Environmental review is not required for this item under CEQA guidelines. FISCAL IMPACf There is no fiscal impact. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE None. ~COMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council support AB 8 (Connolly), oppose SB 695 (Leonard), oppose AB 267 (Statham), oppose AB 1813 (McDonald), oppose AB 2010 (Brulte), support SB 450 (Dills), oppose SB 552 (Hughes), support AB 200 (T. Friedman), support SB 1234 (Hurtt), support SB 1204, support AB 11 (Eastin), oppose AB 1484 (Speier), oppose SB 1154 (Watson). support AB 691 (Richter), oppose AB 1887 (Hauser), oppose SCA 22 (Maddy), oppose SB 1114 (Maddy), support SB 48 (Alquist), support AB 161 (Willie Brown), oppose AB 1678 (Bowen), support AB 2286 (Pringle), AB 981 (Hauser) and direct staff to notify the appropriate Assembly and Senate Committees about the City's position on each measure. """ ACflON 1 of 20 APR Z 7 1993 ITEM 22 -.,--- ,-- ---- -----~--_.-_.,_.- -~"..,," "! AGENDA REPORT CITY OF POW A Y This report is included on the Consent Calendar. There will be no separate discussion of the report prior to approval by the City Council unless members of the Council, staff or public request it to be removed fr?~ t~e ~onsent Calendar and discussed separately. If you wish to have this report pulled for discussion, please fill out a slip Indicating the report number and give it to the City Clerk prior to the beginning of the City Council meeting. TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Mana~ INITIATED BY: Janis Acosta, Management Analys qo.... DATE: April 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Status of Pending Legislation BACKGROUND The League of California Cities has brought several pieces of legislation to the attention of the City. The measures include: AB 8 (Connolly) Beer Keg Tagging Program; SB 695 (Leonard) Homeowners' Relief Act of 1993 pertaining to local fees and assessments; AB 267 (Statham) Vehicle and Cigarette Tax; AB 1813 (MCDOnald) redevelopment agency investments toward the growth of minority, women and small business enterprises; AB 2010 (Brulte) redevelopment agency legal action restrictions; SB 450 (Dills) local authority for solid waste services; SB 552 (Hughes) minority, women, and disabled veteran business enterprise participation goals for public works projects; AB 200 (T. Friedman) prevailing wage rates; SB 1234 (Hurtt) prevailing wage companion measure to Assemblyman Goldsmith's AB 193; SB 1204 (Lewis) prevailing wage calculation; AB 11 (Eastin) recycled products; AB 1484 (Speier) and SB 1154 (Watson) emergency medical services agency; AB 1887 (HauSer) Statement of Indebtedness; AB 691 (Richter) redevelopment plan amendment notices; SCA 22 and SB 1114 (Maddy) Public Safety; SB 48 (Alquist) and AB 161 (Willie Brown) Sales and Use Taxes; AB 1678 (BOwen) General plan Compliance; AB 2286 (Pringle) Booking Fee Reform Package; and AB 981 (Hauser) Mandatory Periodic Historic Resource Survey. FINDINGS AB 8 (Connolly) - Alcoholic Beveraqes. Beer Keqs. On November 10, 1992, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 92-191 endorsing legislation establishing beer keg tagging programs. Linda Oravec, Executive Director of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Task Force Coalition (ADAPT) , urged the City to adopt such a resolution since a recent study found that San Diego County youth use alcohol at a hi her rate than 0 ACTION: 2 of 20 A?q Z 7 1993 ITEM 22 - -, Agenda Report pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 2 57 other counties in the state. Law enforcement throughout the country have also found underage drinking to be prevalent with beer keg parties. Under existing law it is a misdemeanor to sell or provide an alcoholic beverage to persons under the age of 21. The present fine is $250 or community service work. Assemblymember Connolly has introduced AB 8 which would require all retailers who sell keg beers to place an identification tag on each keg identifying the purchaser of the keg. Possession of a keg without an identification tag would be a misdemeanor under the provisions of AB 8. The measure would also require retailers to maintain records of the keg purchasers for 6 months and the records must be made available for inspection by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. If the identification tags are removed from a keg, the purchaser's deposit would be forfeited. The League of California Cities supports AB 8 since the measure is aimed at assisting cities efforts to control underage drinking problems. AB 8 has passed both the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee and the Assembly Ways and Means Committee. The measure is presently located in the Assembly Third Reading file. It is being recommended that the City Council support AB 8 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City's support of the measure. SB 695 (Leonard) - Fees and Assessments Senator Leonard introduced SB 695 on March 3, 1993 which proposes to hold elections on new assessments and fees through the enactment of the Homeowners' Relief Act of 1993. The measure would require a hearing and two-thirds approval of voters in order for cities to impose or increase any local tax, assessment, fee or any other charge related to the ownership of property. The measure would require cities to identify all effected parcels and determine the proportionate benefit from proposed assessments. Affected property owners would be required to receive a notice from the City that explains the proposed assessment. The revenues generated from any assessment could not be used for purposes other than for what the assessment was imposed. SB 695 would apply to water, sewer, solid waste .... collection services fees. 3 of 20 APR 27 1993 ITEM 22 --,--~~ -----~..- Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 3 The League of California Cities is opposed to SB 695 since the measure further limits a city's ability to respond to the state's attempt to shift local revenue. Proponents of the measure contend that property owners and tax payers should determine whether local governments should use fees and assessments for services and facilities. Since Proposition 13 did not limit the benefit assessments and fees, cities have shifted by imposing assessments and fees to generate revenues. SB 695 has been read a second time and amended in the Senate Local Government Committee. The measure has been re-referred to the Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose SB 695 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. AB 267 (Statham) - Vehicle and Ciqarette Tax Assemblymember Statham has introduced AB 267 which relates to vehicle license fee, motor vehicle fuel license tax, and use fuel tax laws and highway users tax account in the transportation tax fund. The measure enables a county that does not contain any incorporated cities to receive specified allocations of revenues. For instance, under existing law, following the allocation vehicle license fee revenues to cities and counties for specified purposes, 50 percent of the remaining vehicle license fee revenue is allocated to counties and 50 percent to cities in proportion to population. If enacted, AB 267 would enable counties with no incorporated cities to receive vehicle license fees as both a county, and a "city and county." The County of Trinity has sponsored AB 267 in an attempt to receive revenues incorporated cities receive to fund municipal services. Since Trinity County functions as both a county and city, Trinity County officials contend that Trinity should receive revenue as both a city and county. Opponents of the measure argue that counties containing no incorporated cities already benefit from not having to share sales tax allocations. Further, the measure would permit counties to dip twice into apportionments of vehicle license fees, gas tax, and diesel tax revenues. The League of California Cities is opposed to AB 267 since the measure would allow three counties, Alpine, Mariposa, and Trinity, that have no incorporated cities, to receive vehicle license fees as both a county and a city and county. The League has estimated that the three counties would reduce the amount of vehicle license revenue available to cities by $1.2 million 4 of 20 APR Z 7 1993 ITEM 22 Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 4 annually. In addition, the same three counties would receive gasoline tax subventions as a city and county reducing the amount available to cities by $500,000 annually. On April 14, 1993, AB 267 failed passage in the Assembly Local Government Committee, however, a reconsideration was granted for the measure. It is being recommended that the City oppose AB 267 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Local Government Committee about the City'S opposition to the measure. AB 1813 (MCDonald) - Redevelopment Assemblymember McDonald has introduced AB 1813 in an attempt to establish specific requirements for redevelopment agency investments. under existing Community Redevelopment Law, redevelopment agencies are required to address blight as defined by each community. The provisions of AB 1813 would require redevelopment agencies to invest no less than 15 percent of its revenue towards the growth of minority, women, and small business enterprises. It is the author's intent to require redevelopment agencies to invest no less than 15 percent of the agency's revenues in small businesses that are owned by minorities and women in order to stimulate job growth. The League of California Cities is opposed to AB 1813 since the League believes that if AB 1813 was enacted, economic development and redevelopment would diminish significantly. The League contends that many project areas are in commercial and industrial areas where there are very few residents. The measure's attempt to stimulate local job growth would be impossible without residents within the project area. AB 1813 has been scheduled several times for a hearing the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee, but has not yet been heard. The measure has been re-scheduled to be heard on April 28, 1993. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 1813 and direct staff to immediately notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. AB 2010 (Brulte) - Redevelopment: Leqal Action Restrictions The County of San Bernardino has sponsored AB 2010 which would prohibit a redevelopment agency from bringing a legal action against another public agency that does not have jurisdiction to conduct its activities within the agency's project area. The measure further prohibits the use of redevelopment agency 5 of 20 APR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 ----- -------- Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 5 funds for a legal action for subject matters that involve property or other matters outside of the project area. Additionally, if a court determined that the agency could file suit against another public agency, AB 2010 would prohibit an agency from filing suit. The League of California Cities is opposed to AB 2010. Since redevelopment agencies build infrastructures, acquire property for relocation purposes, and finance low and moderate income housing outside project areas, the measure would prohibit an agency from enforcing its own contracts or defending itself against lawsuits. The League believes that the measure has been proposed based upon a unspecific situation, affecting all redevelopment agencies in the state. AB 2010 is presently located in the Assembly Housing and Community Development. A hearing date has not yet been set for the measure. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 2010 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. SB 450 (Dills) - Solid waste In 1989, the California Integrated Waste Management Act was enacted through AB 939. The Act requires cities and counties to reduce, recycle, and compost 25 percent of the solid waste generated by 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. Under the Act, cities have broad authority to determine if solid waste hauling is handled by the city or by contract with a private or public agency. Cities may determine whether solid waste services are handled by contract, exclusive or non-exclusive franchise, or permit. Service levels and operational requirements may also be determined by cities. In response to a recent court decision in the Rancho Mirage case and ambiguities in existing law, Senator Dills has introduced AB 450 which attempts to clarify local regulatory authority in existing law. Following the Rancho Mirage case, there has been question about the extent to which local agencies can regulate solid waste and recyclables. The appeal of the Rancho Mirage decision is pending in the California Supreme Court. Specifically, the SB 450 would revise the definition of "authorized recycling agency" to mean a municipal collection service, a private refuse hauler, a private recycling enterprise, or a private nonprofit corporation or association. SB 450 6 of 20 APR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 , Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 6 clarifies that anyone may give away or sell recyclable materials, even in cases where a city has established an exclusive franchise with a waste hauler. The intent of AB 450 is to maintain existing regulatory authority, not to expand it. Proponents of SB 450, such as the League of California Cities, contend that it is critical for local agencies to maintain broad flexibility in integrated waste management planning to ensure compliance of the Act. Proponents believe that waste generators should be able to donate or sell their recyclable solid waste. Opponents claim that SB 450 would drastically impact the California recycling industry by requiring recycling businesses to be regulated as solid waste haulers. Opponents argue further that AB 450 may force recyclers out of business and reduce the amount of recycling achieved in California. The League of California Cities is opposed to SB 450, arguing that the measure would severely restrict and weaken cities' current authority to regulate solid waste handling and recycling. The measure would enable anyone to collect recyclable materials or solid waster for a charge in a city even if the city has entered into an exclusive franchise agreement with another party. Recyclers would also be allowed to operate outside the franchise or regulatory system and charge for collection which would be in conflict with a non-exclusive franchise that requires franchised haulers to meet specified performance standards and fee restrictions. SB 450 was passed and amended in the Senate Governmental Organization Committee. The measure is presently located in the Senate Second Reading File. It is being recommended that the City Council support SB 450 and direct staff to notify the local Senate delegation about the City's position on solid waste management. SB 552 (Huqhes) - Public Works Proiects Senator Hughes has introduced SB 552 which proposes to require all local agencies to adopt minority business enterprise, women business enterprise, and disabled veteran business enterprise participation goals that meet or exceed state agency participation goals. Existing law requires local agencies to award contracts to the lowest responsible bidders who meet participation goals for minority business enterprises, women business enterprises, and disabled veteran business enterprises. 7 of 20 Arq 0) "i '903 ITEM ?"" .' ",. '.... _t:.. ---~._-,--~--_.- Agenda Report . pending Legislation April 27, 1993 page 7 SB 552 would authorize state funds for local public works projects to be granted only to local agencies that have adopted participation goals for minority business enterprise, women business enterprise, and disabled veteran business enterprise that meet state goals. The intent of participation goals is to expand competition and provide greater opportunities for economically disadvantaged groups. The League of California Cities Transportation and Public Works Committee is strongly opposed to SB 552. The Committee is opposed to the measure since it is a state mandate and believe that it should be up to individual cities to determine if . participation goals are appropriate. SB 552 is waiting to be heard in the Senate Local Government Committee. It is being recommended that the City oppose SB 552 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Government Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. AB 200 (T. Friedman) - Prevailinq waqes Assemblymember T. Friedman has introduced AB 200 which pertains to prevailing wages. Under existing law, the payment of prevailing wages is required for workers employed by private construction contractors on public works projects valued at $1,000 or more. Public agencies awarding public works contracts must obtain applicable prevailing wage rates from the Director of Industrial Relations. The Labor Commissioner is authorized to enforce prevailing laws and to impose penalties. The Labor Commissioner can initiate court proceedings to recover penalties and wages due to workers that have not been paid prevailing rates. The provisions of AB 200 would enable the Labor Commissioner to issue a right-to-sue-letter to an aggrieved worker or representative that authorizes the worker to recover unpaid wages through the court. The measure requires the Labor Commissioner to respond in 10 days and amends the existing 90 day court commencement criteria to include the receipt of the right-to-sue authorization. The California State Council of Carpenters has sponsored AB 200 in an effort to give the Labor Commissioner greater flexibility to enforce public works laws and free existing enforcement staff to address other labor law priorities. The Council of Carpenters believes that the Commissioner will retain enforcement authority by having the discretion to accept or reject a right-to-sue request. S of 20 ,WR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 8 Opponents of the measure, such as the San Diego Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors, argue that provisions within AB 200 would require additional State employees to administer it, and would result in conflicting court decisions because attorneys for plaintiffs would not adhere to well-established Labor Commissioner precedents and procedures. According the League of California Cities, Assemblyman Goldsmith will be offering amendments to AB 200. The first amendment would enable local governments by resolution to not use prevailing wage rates for local funded public works projects. The second amendment would allow a weighted calculation for prevailing wage rates rather than a weighted average of the wages paid in an area. The League supports Assemblyman Goldsmith's amendments and is urging cities to support the amendments. AB 200 has passed in the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee and Assembly Ways and Means Committee. The measure is presently located in the Assembly Third Reading File. It is being recommended that the City Council support Assemblyman Goldsmith's amendments to AB 200 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City's support of the measure. SB 1234 (Hurtt) - Prevailing Wages Senator Hurtt has introduced SB 1234 as a companion measure to Assemblyman Goldsmith's AB 193 which the City Council supported on March 2, 1993. As provided in AB 193, the provisions within SB 1234 would authorize local agencies to adopt a resolution or ordinance that exempts public works projects from prevailing wage requirements except if payment of prevailing wages is required for receiving State or federal grants. SB 1234 is presently located in the Senate Rules Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council support SB 1234 and direct staff to notify the Senate Rules Committee about the City's support. SB 1204 (Lewis) - Prevailing wage Calculation Under existing law, the Director of Industrial Relations is required to determine prevailing wage rates. The Director is required to consider applicable wage rates established by collective bargaining agreements and predetermined federal public works rates. -. APR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 9 of 20 .- --~~-----------_._------_.__._._--- Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 page 9 The provisions of SB 1204 would require the Director of Industrial relations to conduct a survey of the wages paid for work performed. SB 1204 would allow a weighted average calculation to be used instead of the current "modal" approach for determining prevailing wage rages. The League of California Cities has estimated that the measure would actually decrease public works prevailing wage costs by 10 to 35 percent. The League is urging cities to support SB 1204 since the measure is facing stiff opposition from union groups. SB 1204 has been heard and amended in the Senate Industrial Relations Committee. The measure has been re-referred to the Committee. It is being recommended the City Council support SB 1204 and direct staff to notify the Senate Industrial Relations Committee about the City's support of the measure. AB 11 (Eastin) - Recycled Products Assemblymember Eastin has introduced AB 11 which attempts to stimulate recycled product markets. Under existing law, the State Assistance Recycling Marketing Act of 1989 requires government agencies to give purchasing preference to recycled products. Under the provisions of AB 11, if a recycled product costs more than the same product made with virgin material, procuring agencies and the Legislature would be required to purchase fewer of the more costly products or apply a cost savings gained from buying other products made with recycled materials towards the purchase of more costly recycled products. AB 11 would require that at least 50 percent of the total dollar amount of paper products purchased by public agencies be recycled products by January 1, 1996. The measure would revise the percentage of recycled products purchased by procuring agencies from the current 20 percent to 15 percent by January 1, 1996, 30 percent by January 1, 1998 and 50 percent by the year 2000. In 1992, Assemblymember Eastin authored a similar measure (AB 2446) which was vetoed by the Governor. The Governor indicated that he was in support of efforts that encouraged the use of recycled products, but he found the measure to be "open-ended" since the State would be required to purchase a specified percentage of recycled products that might cost more than virgin products. Assemblymember Eastin has added new language to the measure which would direct a procurement department to purchase fewer recycled products if the products cost more than virgin products. 10 of 20 }~rR 27 1993 ITEM 22 . - - Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 10 The state Department of General Services is opposed to AB 11 contending that by setting recycling goals based upon total dollar purchases, the measure promotes low bid disputes where disputers claim that recycling preferences are applied unequally. CalTrans also opposes AB 11 arguing that the recycled paving products do not last as long as virgin paving products. Proponents of measure such as the League of California Cities believe the State's increased purchasing of recycled products will expand recycle markets while reducing the waste that would be sent to landfills. AB 11 was amended and passed in the Assembly Consumer Protection, Governmental Efficiency and Economic Development Committee in March, 1993. The measure has been read and amended a second time in the Assembly, and has been re-referred to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council support AB 11 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Ways and Means Committee about the City's support. AB 1484 (Speier) and SB 1154 (Watson) - Emerqency Medical Service Assemblymember Speier has introduced AB 1484 which proposes to grant county Emergency Medical Services authority over all EMS providers in the county's jurisdiction. Under existing law, the Emergency Medical Services is responsible for coordinating all State EMS services. Each county is allowed to develop an EMS program that designates a local EMS agency. Local EMS agencies can create one or more exclusive operating areas using a competitive process to select service providers. Cities and counties are authorized to contract for ambulance services. Fire protection districts are authorized to provide emergency medical services and ambulance services. County services area may also be established for ambulance services. Within the provisions of AB 1484, the local EMS agency would have the power to approve or disapprove 1) a contract between two or more local agencies for municipal ambulance services, 2) a contract entered into by a city for ambulance services for residents of that city, 3) the establishment of a county service area for ambulance service, 4) the adoption of local regulations pertaining to private ambulance service, and 5) the provision of emergency medical and ambulance services by a fire protection district. Under the provisions of SB 1154, county emergency medical services authority total would be granted discretion over EMS services provided within incorporated and unincorporated areas. l\?R Z 7 1993 ITEM ,," 11 of 20 t::..:'.:. Agenda Report pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 11 The Emergency Medical Services and the California State Association of Counties has sponsored AB 1484 in an effort to clarify that county created and administered EMS agencies should have authority over all local emergency medical service providers. Proponents of both measures believe that the local EMS agency must have authority over all service providers to ensure that the countywide EMS needs are met. Recent litigation, County of San Bernardino v. City of San Bernardino, has caused proponents to fear that the county EMS systems may weaken by allowing cities and fire districts to form EMS entities without county oversight. The court decided in favor of the city in the January, 1993 case, which granted city control of the EMS system within its borders. It is also argued that the measures would end costly litigation between cities and counties related to the control of local EMS systems. The League of California Cities is strongly opposed to AB 1484 and SB 1154 since the measures eliminate local control in determining ambulance services and puts cities in a distinct disadvantage. Opponents of the measures concur with the League and argue that it is appropriate for cities and fire districts to maintain local control over emergency medical services. Opponents believe that cities and fire districts have a better understanding of the residents' needs the level of EMS desired by local taxpayers. On April 13, 1993, AB 1484 failed passage in the Assembly Health Committee, but reconsideration was granted. SB 1154 remains in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 1484 and SB 1154 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Health Committee and the Senate Health and Human Services Committee about the City's opposition to the measures. AB 691 (Richter) - Redevelopment plan Amendment Notices Under existing law related to community redevelopment plans, notices for proposed redevelopment plans and proposed plan amendments must be mailed by "certified mail-return receipt requested" to the last known assessee or owner of each parcel of land in the redevelopment project area and to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies that levies taxes upon any property in the project area. The provisions of AB 691 would modify the existing mailing procedure by requiring redevelopment planning hearing notices to be mailed by first-class mail. . o.(R '2. 7 1993 \1E'M 22. 12 of 20 ,- -- Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 12 The California Redevelopment Association supports AB 691 since redevelopment agencies have experienced the frustration the certified mail requirement creates in communities. Often property owners are not home at the time the letter is delivered, so the property owner must go to the post office to retrieve the letter. Since the poway Redevelopment Agency has recently mailed redevelopment plan amendment hearing notices by certified mail, the agency has experienced this frustration from community members having to make a trip to the post office to pick up a public hearing notice. AB 691 is presently located in Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council support AB 691 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's support of the measure. AB 1887 (Hauser) - Redevelopment. Statement of Indebtedness Assemblymember Hauser initially introduced AB 1887 to conduct a study of redevelopment impact by the California Debt Advisory Commission. On April 14, 1993, Assemblymember Hauser amended AB 1887 by substantially modifying redevelopment agencies' Statement of Indebtedness. Under existing law, Section 16 of Article XVI of the California Constitution enables the Legislature to require a redevelopment plan to provide for the division of property within a redevelopment project area. A specific portion of the tax revenues are to be allocated to the redevelopment agency to repay indebtedness incurred by the agency to finance the redevelopment project. Community Development Law requires redevelopment agencies to file annual statements of indebtedness to obtain property tax revenue allocations. An annual statement of Indebtedness must contain specified information about the financial transactions of the redevelopment agency. Further. existing Community Redevelopment Law prohibits the county auditor from allocating more tax increment funds listed on the Statement of Indebtedness. The county auditor may dispute the indebtedness amount, but not the validity of the debt. The recently amended version of AB 1887 would revise allocation procedures for the payment of tax revenue to redevelopment agencies. Specifically, the measure would require redevelopment agencies to submit contracts or debt instruments with the statement of Indebtedness to prove a debt entered into the previous fiscal year. The county auditor would be authorized to A?R 2 7 1993 IT~~~ 22 13 of 20 . J....... - ----- ------ Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 page 13 assess a $1,000 monthly fine, not to exceed nine months, for each month the statement of Indebtedness is not filled by the October 1 deadline. AB 1887 would require the statement of Indebtedness to be in a specified form determined by the state Controller and would require the Controller to include detailed information about the nature of the debt. The measure would establish a maximum reserve of 8 percent of the agency's annual budget for contingencies, excluding the low- and moderate-income housing fund. Amounts allocated to redevelopment agencies would be limited for amounts pledged for a loan, advance or other indebtedness listed on the statement of Indebtedness, net interest amount due or to be paid during the current reported fiscal year, and the amount required for the 20 percent set- aside. Lastly, the measure would authorize the county auditor to dispute loan amounts, advances, or indebtedness reported. The California Redevelopment Association is opposed to AB 1887 since Assemblymember Hauser added language to the measure that changes the statement of Indebtedness. Assemblymember Hauser's intent of the measure is to clarify and give explicit direction to redevelopment agencies on how to prepare and file a statement of Indebtedness. In addition, Assemblymember Hauser intends to use the measure to carry out the Governor's budget proposal so that redevelopment activities are not harmed. However, the California Redevelopment Association argues that AB 1887 does not. address key budget issues of concern to redevelopment agencies. AB 1887 was amended and passed in the Assembly Housing and community Development Committee. The measure is presently located in the Assembly Second Reading File. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 1887 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City's opposition to the measure. SCA 22 (Maddy) and SB 1114 (Maddy)- Public Safety During the end of 1992 Legislative Session, the Governor supported a "super mandate" which would have required cities and counties to hold public safety services harmless when local governments were faced with budget cuts. Although the measure was not enacted, Senator Maddy has introduced two measure that propose to make public safety services the "first responsibility" of cities and counties. Under the California Constitution, counties or cities may make and enforce all local police, sanitary, and other ordinance that do not conflict with general laws. Senate Constitution Amendment 4\PR 27 1993 I'T~" ~ 2.2 14 of 20 . ...j~' - ,- - Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 14 22 proposes that the first responsibility of each city, county, or city and county is to protect public safety. The governing body of each local agency would be required under SCA 22 to give priority to providing adequate public safety by setting aside first from all revenues available to the local agency a sufficient amount to fund adequate police, fire, and prosecution services. SB 1114 proposes the above provision and adds that the legislative body of each local agency be required to determine the adequacy of police, fire, and prosecution services and the adequacy of funding for those services which would impose a state-mandated local program. The League of California Cities is strongly opposed to both SCA 22 and SB 1114 contending that there is no public policy behind the measures to make any rational sense. Several problems within the measures identified by the League include holding the police and fire harmless from cuts regardless of the service levels in a J community. The measure would force budget cuts to be concentrated in all non-public safety services despite the service demands of citizens. Both measures would create litigation from law enforcement agencies and supporters disputing the service levels necessary to comply with the measure. Impossible spending constraints would be imposed similar to those imposed on state finances by Proposition 98. Lastly, the measure would create liability issues for law enforcement since the measures require the determination of "adequate public safety." SCA 22 and SB 1114 are scheduled to be heard in the Senate Local Government Committee on Wednesday, April 28, 1993. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose SCA 22 and SB 1114 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Government Committee immediately about the City's opposition to the two measures. SB 48 (Alquist) and AB 161 (Willie Brown) - Sales and Use Taxes Under the existing Sales and Use Tax Law, a tax is imposed at the rate of 6 percent on the sale, storage. use, or other consumption of tangible personal property. The 6 percent rate includes a one-half cent that will cease on July 1, 1993. Both SB 48 and AB 161 propose to extend the one-half cent rate indefinitely. It has been estimated that the continuation of the one-half cent sales tax rate would generate about $1.4 billion annually for the State's General Fund. The intent of the measures is to address the State's on-going budget problems. Legislative Analyst's Office has estimated that the State is presently facing a $8.6 billion deficit for Fisc~l Year 1993-94. A"R 2 7 1993 ,.....-~~ 22 ol;;" " 15 of 20 ------ Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 15 The League of California Cities supports both SB 48 and AB 161 and is urging cities to support the measure. SB 48 was amended and passed in the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee and is presently located in the Senate Second Reading File. AB 161 passed the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee and has been re-referred to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council support SB 48 and AB 161 and direct staff to notify the local Senate delegation and the Assembly Ways and Means Committee about the City's support. AB 1678 (Bowen) - General plan Compliance Under existing law, planning agencies are required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of a city or county. The Planning Advisory and Assistance Council has been created within the Office of Planning and Research to evaluate the planning functions of state agencies. Under the provisions of AB 1678, the Planning Advisory and Assistance Council (PAAC) would be required to determine if a city or county complied with general plan requirements. Cities and counties would be required to submit a copy of its general plan to the PAAC by July 1, 1994. The PAAC would be required to notify the city or county if the plan did not comply with general plan requirements and if the plan has not been revised within 10 years. If a plan is not brought into compliance within 180 days, the PAAC submits a noncompliance finding to the State Controller and the Controller would withhold local sales and use tax proceeds until the PAAC notified the Controller that the city or county was in compliance. The League of California Cities is opposed to AB 1678 contending that the measure creates a "duty" to revise general plans with a 15 or 20 year planning horizon for every 10 years. The League believes there are reasons for not revising general plans. That is, often there is a lack of substantial change for a general plan due to a community's commitment to carrying out the plan. Further, it is an expensive process to revise general plans. AB 1678 has been amended in the Assembly Local Government Committee and remains in Committee. The measure is scheduled to be heard April 28, 1993. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 1678 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Local Government Committee immediately about the City's opposition to the measure. 16 of 20 A?R 2 7 1993 ITEl:. 22 - -- Agenda Report pending Legislation April 27, 1993 page 16 AB 2286 (Pringle) - Booking Fee Reform Package under existing law, counties are authorized to collect fees for the administrative costs from arresting agencies for the booking and processing of arrested persons. The provisions of AB 2286 would refine administrative costs related to the booking and processing of arrested persons and exempt a city of fees in certain circumstances. The court would be required to order a convicted person to reimburse the county or arresting agency for the fees. The judgement of conviction would be required to contain an order for the payment of the fee. The California Police Chiefs Association has sponsored AB 2286 which represents a negotiated compromise between the Police Chiefs and the County Sheriff's Association that occurred last year. The measure does not repeal booking fees, but attempts to clarify the existing booking fee situation. Although the League of California Cities continues to believe that booking fees are bad public policy, the League supports AB 2286 since the measure addresses three important issues. The measure would restrict booking fees to discretionary arrests made by police agencies, define the booking process and restrict booking fees to the actual administrative costs involved, and eliminates the A-87 overhead standard. AB 2286 passed the Assembly Local Government Committee and has been re-referred to the Assembly ways and Means Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council support AB 2286 and direct staff to notify the Assembly ways and Means Committee about the City's support of the measure. AB 981 (HauSer) - Mandatory Periodic Historic Resource Survey Assemblymember Hauser has introduced AB 981 which would require redevelopment agencies to identify historically significant properties within a redevelopment project areas. The provisions of AB 981 would require redevelopment plans adopted after March 15, 1994 to include a list of properties or structures within the project area that have previously been listed on federal, state, or local registers of historic properties. AB 981 would require agencies to adopt a list of historically significant structures and buildings within six months of the adoption of a redevelopment plan or amendment to a plan. Redevelopment agencies would be required to update the list every five years during the lifetime of the plan. Lists must be submitted to the State Office of Historic Preservation within 30 days. APR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 17 of 20 ,-- Agenda Report Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 17 The California Preservation Foundation has sponsored this measure. The author of the measure believes that economic development opportunities have been lost because historic resources were unknown, unappreciated, or unidentified. The author contends that there have been costly delays in development and historic properties have been destroyed because of the ignorance of some communities. The League of California Cities and the California Redevelopment Association are opposed to AB 981. The League and CRA believe that the mandate imposed by AB 981 would be costly, require specialized consultants, create delays, and initiate fears that redevelopment projects involve the removal of historic structures. Further, AB 981 does define the extent to which a survey needs to be completed in order to place a building on a historic preservation list. AB 981 was amended and passed in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee. The measure has been re- referred to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee. It is being recommended that the City Council oppose AB 981 and direct staff to notify the Assembly ways and Means Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental review is not required for this item under California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE None. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: 1- Support AB 8 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City'S support of the measure. 2. Oppose SB 695 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. ~p~ 2 7 1993 ITEM 22 18 of 20 - Agenda Report . Pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 18 3 . Oppose AB 267 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Local Government Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. 4. Oppose AB 1813 and direct staff to immediately notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. 5. Oppose AB 2010 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. . 6. Support SB 450 and direct staff to notify the local Senate delegation about the City's position on solid waste management. 7. Oppose SB 552 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Government Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. 8. Support Assemblyman Goldsmith's amendments to AB 200 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City's support of the measure. 9. Support SB 1234 and direct staff to notify the Senate Rules Committee about the City's support. 10. Support SB 1204 and direct staff to notify the Senate Industrial Relations Committee about the City's support of the measure. lI. Support AB 11 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Ways and Means Committee about the City's support. 12. Oppose AB 1484 and SB 1154 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Health Committee and the Senate Health and Human Services Committee about the City's opposition to the measures. 13. Support AB 691 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee about the City's support of the measure. 14. Oppose AB 1887 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation about the City's opposition to the measure. }~(R 27 1993 'l~lr.. 22 19 of 20 Agenda Report pending Legislation April 27, 1993 Page 19 15. Oppose SCA 22 and SB 1114 and direct staff to notify the Senate Local Government Committee immediately about the City's opposition to the two measures. 16. Support SB 48 and AB 161 and direct staff to notify the local Senate delegation and the Assembly ways and Means Committee about the City's support. 17. Oppose AB 1678 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Local Government Committee immediately about the City's opposition to.the measure. 18. Support AB 2286 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Ways and Means Committee about the City's support of the measure. 19. Oppose AB 981 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Ways and Means Committee about the City's opposition to the measure. 20 of 20 APR 2 7 1993 ITEM 22