Item 14 - Status Report on Pending LegislationTO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
,~OM. James L. Bowersox, City Man
INI~A~D BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager
Penny Riley, Senior Management Analys~-j
DA~: March 7, 1995
SUBJECT: Status Report on Pending Legislation
The League of California Cities has informed the City of the following measures which
are pending in the State Legislature: AB 82 (Pringle) Booking Fee Reform; SB 11
(Ayala) Unfunded Mandates; SB 178 (Beverly) Industrial Bonds; and SB 51 (Haynes}
Inverse Condemnation. '
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
-rnvironmental review is not required for this item under California Environmental
.uality Act guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this informational report.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONAND CORRESPONDENCE
Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith; Senator David Kelley; Bob Wilson, the City's Lobbyist; and
the League of California Cities were notified of this agenda item.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council support AB 82 (Pringle) Booking Fee Reform;
support SB 11 (Ayala) Unfunded Mandates; support SB 178 (Beverly} Industrial Bonds; and
oppose SB 51 (Haynes} Inverse Condemnation; and direct staff to notify the appropriate
Assembly and Senate committees of the City's position on each measure.
ACTION
I of § MAR ;' 1995 ITEM 1~-
CITY OF POWAY
AGENDA REPORT
FROM: James L. Bowersox, C~ty Mana)~l~~
INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager~
Penny Riley, Senior Management Analyst~-~q
DATE: March 7, 1995
SUBJECT: Status Report on Pending Legislation
BACKGROUND
The League of California Cities has informed the City of the following measures
which are pending in the State Legislature: AB 82 (Pringle) Booking Fee Reform;
SB 11 (Ayala) Unfunded Mandates; SB 178 (Beverly) Industrial Bonds; and SB 51
{Haynes) Inverse Condemnation.
FINDINGS
AB 82 (Prinqle) - Bookinq Fee Reform
Assemblymember Pringle introduced AB 82 on December 22, 1994, which provides that
any increase in a booking fee charged by a county shall be adopted prior to the
beginning of the county's fiscal year and may be adopted only after a noticed,
public hearing has been held. This legislation also requires any county that
imposes a booking fee to negotiate a reduced fee with any city within the county
that is involved with the processing of arrestees {pre-booking).
The League of California Cities supports AB 82 because it will restore order and
fairness to the process of booking fees imposed by counties on cities. AB 82
will make it more difficult for counties to institute multiple increases of
booking fees by requiring public hearings and prefiscal year adoption of
increases. All governments who must plan ahead for budget matters have problems
coping with mid-year unannounced fiscal increases in core programs.
AB 82 will place some much-needed order and stability into this arena.
It is estimated that the City of Poway will spend over $75,000 for booking fees
in the 1995/96 fiscal year. It is recommended that the City Council support AB
82 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Committee on Local Government of the
City's support for booking fee reform legislation.
2 of 5 NAR ? 1995 ITEM 1# ~
Agenda Report
Pending Legislation
March 7, 1995
Page 2
$~ 11 (Ayala) - Unfunded Mandates
Senator Ayala introduced SB 11 on December 5, 1994, which provides that all
state-mandated local programs, with specified exceptions, enacted after the
effective date of this bill are inoperative unless fully funded by the state.
However, the bill authorizes local governments to implement those programs with
their own resources. The League of California Cities supports SB 11 because it
would enable cities to fund the highest priority services for the citizens by
allowing the elected officials of the local community to make the decisions
regarding the needs of the community.
SB ]1 was heard in the Senate Committee on Local Government on March 1, lggs.
The bill passed and was re-referred to the Senate Committee on Appropriations.
It is recommended that the City Council support SB 11 and direct staff to notify
the Senate Appropriations Committee of the City's support for the measure.
SB 178 (Beverly) - Industrial Bonds
Senator Beverly introduced SB 178 on January 31, 1995, which reauthorizes the use
of industrial development bonds (IDBs). The original authorization expired on
December 31, 1994. The federal government extended this economic incentive in
late 1993, but California allowed the authority to lapse in 1994, leaving
California at a competitive disadvantage with other states offering IDBs as an
incentive to attract manufacturers.
The League and the California State Association of Counties co-sponsor a program
to assist local communities in providing IDBs to California manufacturers. Over
the past six years, the program has assisted 68 manufacturers to finance plant
expansions totaling $192 million, resulting in approximately 4,000 new jobs for
California.
As the California economy recovers, IDBs are urgently needed to continue the
momentum and maintain our competitive position with other states. The League has
recently submitted applications to the state for four manufacturers to finance
$165 million of plan expansions representing the retention of 473 jobs and the
potential for 320 new jobs in California. Without the urgent passage of this
legislation, the League has been advised that no official action can be taken on
these applications or the other requests for financing.
This legislation could potentially assist operations in the South Poway Business
Park. It is recommended that the City Council support SB 178 and direct staff to
notify the Senate Appropriations Committee of the City's support for the measure.
SB 51 (Haynes) - Inverse Condemnation
Senator Haynes introduced SB 51 on December 20, 1994, which revises the inverse
condemnation proceeding provision to specify its applicability to personal as
well as real property, the concept of damaging as well as the taking of property,
3 of 5 MAR ? 1995 ITEM
Agenda Report
Pending Legislation
March 7, lgg5
Page 3
and allocates appellate court costs actually incurred because of the inverse
condemnation proceeding.
The League of California Cities believes this measure will increase municipal
liability for alleged inverse condemnation by damaging and taking both personal
and real property. Sponsors of the bill claim that SB 51 merely codifies
existing law. The League firmly believes that its vague drafting goes beyond
existing case law and will result in a dramatic increase in frivolous lawsuits.
The League strongly opposes SB 51.
The bill makes three changes to existing inverse condemnation law:
· Applies takings principles to the "damaging" of property;
· Adds personal property to the interests that a plaintiff may claim have
been taken pursuant to eminent domain; and
· Allows plaintiffs' attorney fees to be awarded in appellate proceedings.
Broad Interpretation of "Damaqinq Could ADDlv to Zoninq Reaulation~
SB 51 does not specifically define what is included within the term "damaging."
Courts have repeatedly upheld the power of government to regulate property
without triggering inverse condemnation liability. The addition of the words "or
damaging" will foreseeably give rise to claims of inverse condemnation where
regulation by zoning, abatement or other means diminishes the potential value of
property.
Personal Property Should Receive Special Treatment Under Eminent Domain Law
While courts have awarded damages for the loss of personal property under eminent
domain theories, those awards are limited to circumstances where the loss of
personal property is incidental to the loss of real property. For example, where
flooding of real property results in the loss of personal property, the loss of
personal property is compensable. SB 51 does not require that the personal
property be attached to real property or that there be a nexus to the damaging of
real property.
These provisions are likely to cause takings litigation devoted to appraisals of
personal property. Such appraisals will be even more costly and uncertain since
broadly accepted uniform standards do not exist.
Attorney Fees Should be Available to the City as Prevailinq Party
Expanding the availability of Attorney Fees is viewed as disruptive to the
settlement process. The policy of encouraging prompt settlements is thwarted
where a plaintiff rejects a reasonable offer to hold out for an award of attorney
4 of 5
~AR? 1995 ITEM
Agenda Report
Pending Legislation
March 7, 1995
Page 4
fees after protracted litigation. Attorney fees should be available, if at all,
only where a court determines the city's offer was unreasonable. In that
instance, fees are not a windfall to the plaintiff. If attorney fees are to be
awarded in inverse condemnation actions, they should be awarded to the prevailing
party, not simply to the plaintiff.
It is recommended that the City Council oppose SB 51 and direct staff to notify
the Senate Judiciary Committee of 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 associated with this informational report.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith; Senator David Kelley; Bob Wilson, the City's Lobbyist;
and the League of California Cities were notified of this agenda item.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Support AB 82 and direct staff to notify the Assembly Committee on Local
Government of the City's support for the measure.
2. Support SB 11 and direct staff to notify the Senate Appropriations Committee
of the City's support for the measure.
3. Support SB 178 and direct staff to notify the Senate Appropriations Committee
of the City's support for the measure.
4. Oppose SB 51 and direct staff to notify the Senate Judiciary Committee of the
City's opposition to the measure.
eb:\rpts\pn(eg.307
5 of 5 )~AR ? 1995 ITEM 14 '-(