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