Item 16.1 - Status Report on Pending Legislation
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
INITIATED BY:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
JaleS L. Bowersox, City Man~
John D. Fitch, Assistant Ci~anager~~t"
Penny Riley, Senior Management AnalY$t1K\L/
---'
- TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECI':
June 13, 1995
Status Report on Pending Legislation
ABSTRACI'
The League of California Cities has informed the City of the following measures which
are pending in the State legislature: AB 1544 (Hannigan) Mello-Roos Taxes. Recently,
the Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Jim Abbott, requested that the City of Poway
take a position on the following measures: SB 1066 (Campbell) Development Fees; SB 96
(Greene) School Bond Financing; and, AB 331 (Alpert) School Bond Financing.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental review is not required for this item under CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACI'
There is no fiscal impact associated with this informational report.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith; Senator David Kelly; Bob Wilson, the City's Lobbyist; and
the league of California Cities will be mailed a copy of this agenda report.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council oppose AB 1544; oppose SB 1066; support SB 96;
and, support AB 331.
ACflON
=
1 of 9
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16. 1
CITY OF PO\\AY
AGENDA REPORT
This report fs 1"e1.... Oft tho Consont Cal.ndar. The,.a .111 ba no .oparat. discussion of tho raport prior to approval by the City
Council unle.s .....~ of tho Council, staff or public ,.aqua.t it to ba r~v.d fr~ the Conlont C.londa,. and discullad I.parat.ly.
If you wish to ha..,. this ,.aport plll1.d for discussfon_ pl.... f111 Ollt . .lip indicating tho rap(II'''t nlMllbol'" and g1vo it. to tho City
Clark prior to tho be,1""1n, of tho City Counctl meating.
TO:
FROM:
INITIATED BY:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
James L. Bowersox, City Manager
~
John D. Fitch, Assistant City Managerlr.f _
Penny Riley, Senior Management Analy~
June 13, 1995
DATE:
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 1544 (Hannigan) Mello-Roos Taxes.
Recently, the Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Jim Abbott, requested that the
City of Poway take a position on the following measures: SB 1066 (Campbell)
Development Fees; SB 96 (Greene) School Bond Financing; and, AB 331 (Alpert)
School Bond Financing. On June 6, 1995, Councilmember Bob Emery requested that
staff prepare a report overviewing the impact of the legislation relating to
funding for school facilities. Included as Attachment A are the letters from Jim
Abbott, Assistant Superintendent of Schools.
FINDINGS
AB 1544 (Hannioan) Mello-Roos Taxes
Assemblymember Hannigan introduced AB 1544 on February 24, 1995, which would
.allow counties to retain the penalty on Mello-Roos Taxes. Current law provides
that counties retain the penalty on delinquent property taxes. The County of
Ventura retained the delinquent penalty on a Mello-Roos Community Facilities
District Tax. The City of Camarillo sued and the appellate court ruled that the
County could not retain the delinquent penalty on the Mello-Roos Tax. AB 1544
would allow the County to retain the penalty on all special taxes, Mello-Roos
taxes, special assessments, and benefit assessments.
The South Poway Business Park has multiple properties with delinquent Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District Taxes forcing other property owners to pay
additional assessments. The City of Poway intends to use the penalty money from
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16. 1
2 of 9
Agenda Report
June 13, 1995
Page 2
the eventual collection of delinquent property taxes to reimburse those property
owners who have incurred additional expenses. AS 1544 would take away the
ability of the City to provide this financial relief. It is recommended that the
City Council strongly oppose AB 1544.
A deadline of June 2, 1995 was set for legislative measures to pass out of the
house of origination. AB 1544 failed to pass on the Assembly floor and has been
made a two-year bill. Staff will strongly oppose AB 1544 when the measure is
reconsidered in January 1996.
SB 1066 (Camobell) Oevelooment Fees
SB 1066 would overturn the Centex Real Estate Corp. case which upheld a City's
ability to charge an excise tax for general fund needs related to new
development. The League filed an amicus brief in that case and believes that the
Court of Appeal correctly decided that there is a distinction between an excise
tax and a fee. The result of passage of SB 1066 is that there would be no
ability to tax development. Any assessment levied on development would be
limited to development fees that meet the narrow nexus test for impacts.
The bill also amends the existing "AB 1600" fee limitations. SB 1066 would limit
the time period in which the fee can be held. Cities sometimes collect fees for
long-term projects for which the remainder of the funding is not available on a
short-term basis. For example, a city may collect a park fee intending to
partially fund the park from development fees and partially fund it from a local
bond measure. If the bond measure fails, the city would need to collect
development fees for a longer period of time to install the park. The city may
calculate a fee based on a development schedule that the applicant does not meet.
The result in either case is that the city must hold on to the money for a longer
period of time than anticipated.
SB 1066 would also require specific identification of the project for which a fee
is levied. Where a fee is earmarked for park development or wastewater
extension, changing circumstances may result in alternative mechanisms for
meeting the community needs. A regional park may be developed in the proximity
of the subdivision. The wastewater line identified for extension may be placed
at a different location. Identifying specific projects does not give sufficient
flexibility. local governments need flexibility to meet the changing needs of
our communities.
Assistant Superintendent Jim Abbott requested that the City of Poway oppose
SB 1066 because the measure will overturn a court decision which is important to
reinforcing the ability of cities and counties to deny the approval of new
development if adequate school facilities are not available. (See Attachment A.)
3 of 9
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16. 1
Agenda Report
June 13, 1995
Page 3
A deadline of June 2,
house of origination.
of Rule 61(a).
Staff will strongly oppose SB 1066 when the measure is considered on the Senate
floor in the next ten days.
1995 was set for legislative measures to pass out of the
SB 1066 was granted additional time through a suspension
SB 96 (Greene) Bonds: School Facilities Fundina
Senator Greene introduced SB 96 on January 1, 1995 that enacts the School
Facilities Bond Act of 1996 which provides for the issuance of bonds and the
expenditure of revenues to provide aid to school districts in accordance with the
Greene Act and related school facilities programs. It requires that any funds
remaining from designated school construction bond measures enacted in prior
years be transferred to the State School Building Lease-Purchase Fund for
apportionment under the Greene Act.
Assistant Superintendent Jim Abbott states that there is currently a need for SI9
billion for new school facilities throughout the State. This measure will place
a S2 billion school bond issue before the voters in 1996. It is recommended that
the City Council support SB 96 which will be heard by the Senate Appropriations
Committee in late June 1995.
AB 331 (Aloert) Bonds: School Facilities and Technoloav Fundina
Assemblymember Alpert introduced AB 331 on February 9, 1995 which makes
provisions for a S2 billion school bond issue before the voters in 1996. Further
the measure requires a school district that maintains a school facility upon
which is operated an extended day care program or a child supervision program to
use the facility's restrooms and playgrounds.
AB 331 has become a two-year bill and will be reconsidered in January 1996. It
is recommended that the City Council support AB 331.
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.
4 of 9
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16. 1
Agenda Report
June 13, 1995
Page 4
ADDITIONAL pufLJC ~OTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith; Senator David Kelley; Bob Wilson, the City's Lobbyist;
and the League of California Cities will be mailed a copy of this agenda report.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Oppose AB 1544 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation of
the City's opposition to the measure when it is reconsidered.
2. Oppose SB 1066 and direct staff to notify the local Senate delegation of
the City's opposition to the measure.
3. Support SB 96 and direct staff to notify the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Bonded Indebtedness and Methods of Financing of the City's
support for the measure.
4. Support AB 331 and direct staff to notify the local Assembly delegation of
the City's support for the measure when it is reconsidered in January 1996.
Attachments: Attachment A - Letters from Poway Unified School District regarding
SB 1066, SB 96, and AB 331
a,neda'statu..61J
5 of 9
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16.
POWAY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
aWSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES
Albeit J AOtlO". .4.Slis~nl Supe,...l.,.d.,1
(6191619.2501
13826 TWIN PEAKS ROAD. POWAY, CA 92064.3098
(619) 748-0010' (619) 586-7500. Fax (619) 746-1342
" . . . serving the communities of Powey, Rencho Bernerdo,
~ncho De I.os Penesqultos, SIIbre Springs, snd Cermel Mounte/n Rench"
OA. FlOBERT L.. REEVES
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
May 25, 1995
Councilmember Bob Emery
City of Poway
P. O. Box 789
Poway, CA 92074-0789
Subject: Senate Bill 1066 (Campbell)
Dear Councilmember Emery:
The Board of Education of the Poway Unified School District is seeking your support and the support of the
County of San Diego in opposing Senate Bill 1066 (Campbell). We have enclosed a copy of our Board of
Education resolution for your infonnation. This bill would overturn three recent court decisions, all of which
have reinforced the ability of the respective cities and counties in the state to deny the approval of new
development if adequate school facilities are not available.
The need for new school facilities is significant in many parts of the state, including San Diego county, where
additional growth is anticipated. Many school districts are experiencing enrollment on their school sites and do
not have the capability of adding more students without having additional facilities. Furthennore, there are
currently no state funds available to assist districts in funding new facilities and local general obligation bonds
are almost impossible to pass. If SB 1066 is approved, it will substantially impact these districts, causing a
further decline in the quality of education.
It is our understanding that most cities and counties have taken an oppose position on this legislation; however,
the message may not be getting to the state legislature. They need to hear from each of you and they need to
hear from your City of Poway staff as soon as possible.
We urge your support in opposing the passage of this legislation and ask that you communicate your concerns
to all members of the state legislature.
Thank you for opposing this legislation.
Sincerely,
o .I.1!;;'-n,
A. J. Abbott
Assistant Superintendent
sk 95.229
Enclosure
6 of 9
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16.
ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. 52-95
POWAY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
RESOLUTION OPPOSING SENATE BILL 1066 (CAMPBELL)
ON MOTION of Member Kathleen Zaworski-Burke
, seconded by Member
Steve McMillan
, the following resolution is adopted:
WHEREAS. current law provide cities and counties with the statutory authority to
approve new development within their jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS. infrastructure facilities such as streets. utilities. libraries, fire stations, police
stations. and schools are needed to support new development; and
WHEREAS, the student population in the state of California is estimated to increase by
170.000 students, annually, over the next five years; and
WHEREAS, school districts do not currently have the ability to fund new school facilities
needed for developing areas; and
WHEREAS, the statewide estimated cost for new school facilities over the next ten
years is $19 billion; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1066 proposes to take local control away frorn cities and
counties by eliminating their ability to deny future development when adequate schools are not
available; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1066 does not provide an adequate funding mechanism to
ensure that adequate schools will be available when new development occurs;
NOW, THEREFORE. the Governing Board of the Poway Unified School District
expresses its strong opposition to the passage of Senate Bill 1066 (Campbell).
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Governing Board on Mav 22. 1995 ,by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
Mangum. McMillan, Ranitle, Zaworski-Burke, Zettel
none
none
I, Jeff Mangum, Clerk of the Goveming Board, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full,
true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Goveming Board at a regularly called and
conducted meeting held on said date.
SB1066.RES
7 of 9
~
JUN 13 1995 ITi:M 16. 1
POWAY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
CA. ROBER,. L.. REEVES
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES
Albel1 J. Abbott. A"'ISW'l1 Superi'llllncl..,l
(619) 879,2501
13626 TWIN PEAKS ROAD' POWAY, CA 92064.3096
(619) 748-0010' (619) 586-7500. Fl' (619) 746-1342
" . . . serving the communities of Powsy, Rsncho Sernsrdo,
Rsncho De Los Penssqultos, Ssbre Springs, and Carmel Mountain Ranch"
May 25,1995
r.r,., -;:
.'~ -
..' "-
Councilmember Bob Emery
City of Po way
P. o. Box 789
Poway, CA 92074-0789
. ..1
",.-
r: -
J.
Subject: Senate Bill 96 (Greene) and Assembly Bill 331 (Alpert)
Dear Councilmember Emery:
The Board of Education of the Poway Unified School District has expressed its unanimous support for the
enclosed resolution endorsing the approval of Senate Bill 96 (Greene) and Assembly Bill 331 (Alpert).
Both of these measures advocate the placement of a $2 billion school bond issue before the voters in 1996.
A $2 billion bond measure is desperately needed if school districts are going to add additional facilities for
the continued growth they are experiencing. In the Poway Unified School District, another 1,000 students
will arrive in September with no new school facilities to accommodate them. Additionally, these bond
funds would provide substantial funding for updating of schools that are over thirty years old.
There is currently a $19 billion need for new school facilities throughout the state. Although a $2 billion
bond issue will not resolve the entire problem, it will provide a step in the right direction. We urge your
support of these legislative measures and request that you communicate your support to all members of the
state legislature. Let's not let public education take another step backward!
Sincerely,
02 tf#J,
A.l Abbott
Assistant Superintendent
sk 95.230
Enclosure
8 of 9
JUN 1 3 1995 ITeM 16. 1
POWA'r UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 98 (GREENE)]
AND ASSEMBLY BILL 331 (ALPERT) ]
1
Resolution No. 53-95
ON MOTION of UlITlber
Steve McMillan
seconded by Member
Charlene Zettel
the following resolution is adopted:
WHEREAS, the student population of Califomia is continuing to grow; and
WHEREAS. the current statewide estimate cost of new school flcilities for the next ten years is $19
billion; and
WHEREAS, the student population of the Poway Unified School District hu increased over 12.000
students since 1985 and is projected to increase further; and
WHEREAS. the District anticipates Mure unfunded needs through the year 2007 in excess of $150
million; and
WHEREAS. the District has state aide applications on file for three growth projects totaling more than
approximately $80 million; and
WHEREAS. the District has five modemiZation applications awaiting construction funding totaling
approximately $5 million; and
WHEREAS, the District has substantial future needs to moderniZe schools becoming thirty years old;
and
NOW, THEREFORE. be it resolved by the Board of Trustees that the Poway Unified School District as
follows:
1. That all members of the State Legislature and the Governor recogniZe the critical need to
resolve the funding needs for constructing additional schools to serve the increasing enrollments
in K-12 schools in the state. .
2. That all members of the State Legislature and the Govemor be urged to support the passage of
legislation to place a $2 billion bond measure on the March 1996 ballot for consideration by the
voters.
PASSED AIIID ADOPTED by the Goveming Board of the Poway Unified School District of San Diego
County, Califomia, thil22nd day of May 1995.
AYES: Mangum, McMillan, Ranftle, Zaworski-Burke, Zettel
NOES: none
ABSENT: none
ABSTAIN: none
This is to certify that the foregoing document is a true copy of the Resolution of the Goveming Board of
the Poway unified School District of San Diego County.
9 of 9
.
Jeff Margym,
)d
JUN 13 1995 ITEM 16.
------