BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1138
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1138 (Pescetti)
As Amended June 25, 2002
2/3 vote. Urgency
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 21, 2002) |SENATE: |38-0 |(June 27, 2002) |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|COMMITTEE VOTE: |9-0 |(July 2, 2002) |RECOMMENDATION: |concur |
| | | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: J., E.D. & E.
SUMMARY : Sets August 19, 2002, as the deadline to close the
protest hearing on the proposed Rancho Cordova incorporation, and
extends the deadline for calling the election on the proposed
incorporation.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill, and
instead:
1)Find and declare that a special law is necessary due to the
unique circumstances faced by the unincorporated community of
Rancho Cordova in the County of Sacramento.
2)Set August 19, 2002, as the deadline to close the protest hearing
on the proposed Rancho Cordova incorporation.
3)Change the deadline for calling the election on the proposed
Rancho Cordova incorporation from 88 days to 78 days before the
next regular election date.
4)Add an urgency clause.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Specifies that a protest hearing of a proposed incorporation may
be continued from time-to-time not to exceed 60 days from the
date specified for the hearing in the notice.
2)Requires that the election on the question of an incorporation
AB 1138
Page 2
shall be called and held on the next regular election date
occurring at least 88 days after the date upon which the
resolution calling the election was adopted by the conducting
authority.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill allowed the Infrastructure and
Economic Development Bank to provide financing to public and
nonpublic parties for repowering of existing electrical facilities
and for planning, design, construction, and startup of peak demand
facilities of up to 150 megawatts.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : Successful city incorporations require five steps: 1)
filing an application with the local agency formation commission
(LAFCO); 2) LAFCO review and approval; 3) a protest hearing by the
"conducting authority;" 4) an election; and, 5) filing formal
documents.
If LAFCO approves a proposed incorporation, the conducting
authority must hold a noticed public hearing to measure any
protests. The conducting authority can continue this protest
hearing for up to 60 days. If a majority of the registered voters
within the proposed new city file written protests, the conducting
authority must terminate the proceedings. If there is no majority
protest, the conducting authority must adopt a formal resolution,
calling an election on the question of cityhood. The election
occurs on the next regular election date that is at least 88 days
after the conducting authority adopts its resolution.
Before 2001, a county board of supervisors was the "conducting
authority" for city incorporation proposals. As part of a major
overhaul of boundary laws, LAFCO is now the conducting authority
[AB 2838 (Hertzberg), Chapter 761, Statutes of 2000]. Boundary
change proposals filed before January 1, 2001, still follow the
prior law.
In late 1999, community leaders filed their application to
incorporate Rancho Cordova with
the Sacramento LAFCO. Sacramento LAFCO approved the proposed
Rancho Cordova incorporation on May 22, 2002. As the
conducting authority, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
will open the protest hearing on July 16. The deadline to place
items on the November 5, 2002, ballot is August 9. State law
allows the county supervisors to continue their hearing for up to
AB 1138
Page 3
60 days, until September 16. If the county supervisors take that
long, they can postpone the Rancho Cordova incorporation election
until 2004.
Achieving cityhood requires synchronizing complicated statutes with
community politics. Some incorporations take two or three attempts
before they succeed. Past resistance by the Sacramento County
Board of Supervisors makes the cityhood advocates worry that the
county supervisors may take advantage of the state law and use the
full 60 days for the protest hearing. That delay would keep Rancho
Cordova off the November ballot and push the election out to 2004.
Although completely legal, that delay could dissipate the
incorporation drive's political momentum. By shortening the
deadlines for the protest hearing and for calling the election,
this bill keeps the Rancho Cordova incorporation on track.
Besides representing the political interests of individual
unincorporated communities, county supervisors are also responsible
for running state-mandated programs that advance the public health
and social welfare. They must balance this public trust with their
constituents' political desires. While the 60-day time period
could conceivably be used for purposes of delay, complex issues
surrounding incorporation may require the supervisors to use the
full period to reach an informed decision. With looming cuts in
state funding, county supervisors must be prudent in all they do.
Placing the Rancho Cordova incorporation on the November 2002
ballot may satisfy local political desires but it may not be
fiscally prudent.
Analysis Prepared by : Joanne Wong / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
FN: 0005835