HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997/06/04 - Agenda Packet - LAFCO WorkshopAGENDA
Pledge of Allegiance
2. Roll Call:
Alexander ~//, Blanc _
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL
Special Workshop ~c~.~ ~
June 4, 1997-12:00 p.m. ~~.
Tri Communities Room ~ ~9~
10500 Civic Center Drive , r...~~~~
Rancho Cucamonga, California
A. CALL TO ORDER /~.'0~ p
B. ITEM OF DISCUSSION
1.
,PRESENTATION BY LAFCO REGARD.!NG ANNEXATION AND SPHERE OF
INFI~UENCE
C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the Council
from addressing any issue not previously included on the agenda. The Council may receive testimony and set the
matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual.
I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the
foregoing agenda was posted on May 29, 1997, twenty-four (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code
54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
......................................................................................... CITY OF RANCHO CUC~IONGA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 21, 1997
TO: .~ May.q~' and Members of City Council
/z~~~;~f( Lain, AICP, City Manager
FRp/~/rad Buller, City Planner
B/~// v Lar~H. uBJECT: ~FC;;;;~s;;, Principal Planner
The following statements are in response to specific questions raised by Council Member Curatalo
at the City Council Meeting of May 7, 1997, regarding annexation.
1. How does LAFCO determine areas of influence (sphere of influence)?
A sphere of influence is "a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local
agency." Section 56425 of the Government Code specifies factors that must be considered
in determining the spheres of influence of each city and special district:
The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space
lands.
· The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area.
The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services which the
agency provides or is authorized to provide.
The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the
Commission determines that they are relevant to the agency.
2. What does an adopted sphere of influence mean to us?
The sphere of influence determines the area for which the City can expect to initiate or have
a property owner initiate a request to annex into the city. The sphere may be annexed in total
or incrementally at any time subject to the policies and determinations of both LAFCO and the
City. In addition, under policy LU-9 (see attached excerpt copy of pages II-D-107 thru 110) of
the County General Plan, development applications will be referred to the city for their review
and comment. Furthermore, the County will consider the local agency development policies
and standards before approving requests for development within the sphere of influence.
MEMORANDUM TO RICK GOMEZ
LAFCO ITEMS
May 21, 1997
Page 2
3. Identify our sphere of influence.
~3
O
FT1
i
.... · , [; ~VMT
0
r-- ITI
N
M~Y15 1997
4. What are some of the pros and cons of annexation?
PROS
CONS
· Increases city land area and ·
population.
· Comprehensive planning and
coordination of infrastructure.
Land use controls.
Current property tax allocations of only
approximately 4 percent place the City in
an inequitable position from a cost
versus revenue generation perspective.
Places additional demands for facilities
and services which if not carefully
analyzed, will be a drain on the financial
resources of the City.
MEMORANDUM TO RICK GOMEZ
LAFCO ITEMS
May 21, 1997
Page 3
5. What is the effect of annexation on the City?
Annexation simply adds jurisdictional control of area by the City, with corresponding
responsibility for services. The financial frame work used to provide capital and operations and
maintenance revenue is imperative in order to assure that any new development associated
with annexation pays it own way without burdening the existing area.
The City has processed five annexations of sphere territory, the last being in 1991. The City
Council has formally adopted City policy relative to annexations within two resolutions. These
two Resolutions (No. 89-568 and No. 91-155--see attached copies) sought the support of the
San Bernardino County Supervisors. Neither Resolution was acted upon by the County Board.
BB:LH:gs
Attachments: Excerpt from San Bernardino County General Plan
City Council Resolutions No.89-568 and No.91-155
SECTION II
Planning Issues
M,4 N. MA DE RESOURC ES
Land Use/Grov4h Management
iii. Intergovernmentai Coordination
There are over 250 units of Federal, State and local governments operating within the
jurisdictional limits of the County. Coordination between all these agencies and all County
departments is essential for the development and implementation of the General Plan.
Such coordination is particularly crucial to:
Resolve potential land use conflicts between the County and'the Federal and State
agencies, such as the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of the In-
terior (DOI) which have jurisdictional control over the majority of land in the County.
· The joint planning efforts of the County and the incorporated cities, regarding land
development policies in the Sphere of Influence (SOl) areas.
Other Jurisdlctlonal Land
All lands controlled by a jurisdiction other than the County are coded to indicate the
agencies that control them on the Official Land Use Districts map. This includes land
controlled by the incorporated cities, Federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), the Department of Defense (DOD), and other State and public
agencies.
Federal land ownership is expected to-c~ange relatively little during the Plan period,
although occasional !and exchanges are anticipated especially between pdvate parties
and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or the National Forest. On the other hand,
incorporated land area is expected to increase due to annexations and incorporations,
thereby reducing the amount of land that is subject to the County's policies and regulations.
Land Use Planning in the Sphere of Influence (SOl) Areas
The incorporated cities are often critical of the land use decisions made by the County in
the sphere of influence areas. The cities' major concerns are that:
.
Some of the land uses proposed by the County for the SOl areas are not
compatible with, and are not logical extensions of the adjacent land uses within
the cities' boundaries.
County development standards are relatively lax, depreciating the quality of t'he
permitted development and adversely impacting the neighborhoods, including
adjacent areas within the cities.
3. The review procedures employed by the County do not include urban design and
architectural design considerations which are used by many cities.
Section 65300 of the California Government Code places a dual mandate on both cities
and counties relating to land use planning within spheres of influence. The land use
policies adopted for the SOl areas are designed to encourage annexations or incorpora-
tions.
o II-D- 107
San Bernardino CounOl
GENERAL PLAN
Adopted JUL Y 1989
Revised December, 1990
D-60
D-61
LU.9
Goals
Promote harmonious and mutually beneficial uses of land among the various public
agencies and jurisdictions present in San Bernardino County.
Promote closer coordination and cooperation among the County, the incorporated cities,
SCA G, SANBA G, the various Special Districts and other local, State and Federal agencies
(whose planning decisions and actions affect more than a single jurisdiction) to address
regional problems such as traffic congestion, air quality, adequacy and quality of potable
water, solid waste management, and preservation of open space.
Encourage cities to annex urban unincorporated areas within designated city spheres of
influence and support annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands.
Develop a policy which encourages implementation of compatible standards and facilities
and encourage annexation for those lands located within the sphere of influence (SOl) of
all cities.
Policies/Actions
Because State law gives cities the ultimate responsibility to manage lands within their
adopted spheres of influence, and because cities are usually best able to manage urban
growth through the provision of services,.tb.e .County has a responsibility to coordinate its
land use policies with the cities. The County needs, thedore, to pursue plans, policies and
programs that support city standards and policies wherever such standards have been
agreed to and jointly adopted.
Until joint plans have been adopted, the County will exercise its authority to refer
development applications to alfected cities and may require development to conform to
city development policies and standards whenever appropriate.
In addition, the policies and standards that encourage annexation and the use of city
standards within city spheres of influence will be considered:
b.
Adopt joint regulations/plans whenever possible through the adoption of overlay
districts, specific plans, zoning studies, infrastructure support plans, and other
appropriate mechanisms.
·
·
Require Conditional Use Permits within city spheres of influence for all develop-
ment other than single family residences, expansions of existing uses that are
less than 25%.
Require service connections for projects that are less than one mile away from
sewer availability. Exceptions (for package wastewater treatment plants, individ-
ual on-site and multiple owner septic systems, holding tanks, and experimental
systems) may be approved subject to review and approval by the County DEHS,
the appropriate regional water quality control board, and the wastewater agency.
/I-D- 108
SECTION II
Planning Issues
MAN- MA DE RESOURCES
Land Use/Growth Management
LU.10
d. Support City annexations/incorporations of urban designated lands.
e. Recognize and implement growth control limits adopted by cities as they apply to
spheres.
f. Initiate Joint Power Agreements (JPAs) with cities to allow for city or County
development fees to.be collected and distributed accordingly.
go
Designate Improvement Levels and Land Use Map changes to more closely
reflect city prepared general plans, pre-zoning and infrastructure and develop-
ment standards for sphere areas.
h.
Designate Sphere of Influence areas on the Land Use Maps as Special Planning
Areas and utilize special city standards in these areas to the extent they are
incorporated in plans adopted as described in subpolicy (a), above.
Because the County wants to minimize land use conflicts be~een the County and other
agencies that have jurisdictional control over lands located within the County, and because
the County wants to cooperate and coordinate with adjacent municipalities and other
regional agencies to address regional problems such as traffic congestion, air pollution,
water quality, waste management and job/housing imbalance, the following policies/ac-
tions shall be implemented:
a.
Review the master plans and/or general plans of all these agencies and incorpo-
rate any and all policies that are applicable and appropriate into the County
General Plan.
bo
Solicit comments from the military and other Federal and State agencies that
control land in the County on projects which are proposed within their designated
peripheral areas.
C.
Develop a procedure to assure that the County, the incorporated cities, and the
various special districts refer major planning and land use proposals to all affected
jurisdictions for review, comment and recommendation.
d°
Establish a "Review Area" around each state, military, or other Federal jurisdic-
tion, and review development proposals or proposed General Plan amendments
and revisions within the established Review Area with the appropriate agency.
e.
Work with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and other public agencies to
eliminate conflicts between public and private lands by reducing the checkerboard
pattern of public/private ownership.
Work with BLM and the Forest Service to ensure that large blocks of public land
are not further subdivided or classified as Governmental Small Tracts, and to
ensure that disposal of public lands shall be based on definite proposals for
development consistent with the County General Plan.
II-D-109
San Bernardino County
GENERAL PLAN
Adopted JUL Y 1989
Revised December. 1990
ge
Work with BLM, the Forest Service and other public agencies to facilitate pub-
lic/private !and exchange to eliminate the need to cross public lands to reach
privately owned lands. Such lands shall when exchanged be subject to all the
policies and standards of "Resource Conservation" (RC) District. However, if
such land is determined by the Drainage Division of the County Land Management
Department or by FEMA to be subject to severe flooding, it shall be subject to the
policies and standards of the "Floodway" (F-W) District. A General Plan Amend-
ment is required to determine the appropriate land use designation for exchanged
lands.
ho
Work with BLM and other public agencies in the designation and protection of
wilderness and restricted natural areas in the approval and management of
recreation events and sites; especially in the East Mojave National Scenic Area
(EMNSA).
i. Work with Indian tribes and State and Federal agencies in the development of
plans for land within their jurisdiction.
j. Permit development adjacent to prisons and similar detention facilities only when
compatible with the security needs of the facility and public safety is assured and:
i) Work closely with State and local officials responsible for administering these
facilities when considering land bse proposals on adjacent lands.
ii) Discourage high density residential uses on adjacent or nearby parcels.
Request that SANBAG act as a forum for discussion of the County's growth
management plan and work toward a consensus with all the cities for ultimate
adoption.
Designate SANBAG as the city/county growlh management forum concerning
regional issues and continue working toward a consensus with surrounding
counties through SCAG and SCAQMD.
m.
Continue to work on specific projects to improve traffic flow, such as the Foothill
Freeway extension project, the Route 91 Task Force, and the Route 60/71 working
group.
iv. Infillin.q
Infilling can be a means of protecting and enhancing older neighborhoods. It is also a way
of maximizing the utilization of existing infrastructure facilities and of saving energy; the
assumptions being that urban services are readily available in infill areas and in addition,
these areas are in close proximity to places of employment. Infilling is an effective method
of preserving land, water and other natural and man-made resources.
- II-D-110
RESOLUTION NO. 89-568
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE SUPPORT OF THE SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RELATIVE TO THE
CITY ACTIONS TO ANNEX THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPHERE AREA
WHEREAS, the City has always maintained that our sphere of influence
is vital to the welfare of our community because of geographic location,
.inter-connection of drainage, circulation, topography, environmental and
service relationships; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to foster the expeditions and logical
annexation of said sphere of influence; and
WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors has expressed
interest in fostering improved sub-regional and local cooperation in planning;
and
WHEREAS, the opportunities are now present to enable a coordinated
approach to land use and development in the sphere; and
WHEREAS, the City desires consistency in development patterns and
regulations between the City's sphere of iQ.fluence and the City; and
WHEREAS, the City feels that the dichotomy between County and City
development regulations, policies, and standards encourages developers to play
one against the other, therefore, frustrating any annexation attempts; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to ensure environmentally, as
well as economically sound planning for the sphere of influence; and
WHEREAS, the annexation of said sphere is a key factor to the
successful moderation of density, use of compatible development standards,
coordination of infrastructure facilities and ultimate development of the
area.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does
hereby resolve as follows:
1. The City requests the cooperation and consent of the
County in annexing all County-owned land within
Rancho Cucamonga's sphere of influence;
·
The City requests the Board of Supervisor's support
for the City's efforts to annex the remainder of its
northern sphere;
3. The County grant to the City through a cooperative
agreement review and processing of all planning and
development proposals (with all requisite processing
fees} within the sphere of influence, while having
the County retain its approval authority;
Resolution No. 89-568 i
Page 2
4. The City urges the Board of Supervisors to adopt a
position that all development within the Rancho
Cucamonga sphere of influence be required to follow
and adhere to all development standards and policies
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
5. The Board of Supervisors consider a 90-120 day
suspension of development applications in our sphere
of influence to enable the proper planning and
coordination of policies between the City and the
County, and that a technical committee comprised of
City and County staff be created to study same.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 28th day of November, 1989.
AYES:
Alexander, Buquet, Brown, Stout, Wright
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Dennis L. Stout, Mayor
ATTEST:
-Ada(~J, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J. ADA&4S, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 28th day of
November, 1989.
Executed this 29th day of November, 1989 at Rancho Cucamonga,
California.
Debra J City Clerk
RESOLUI~ON NO. 91-155
A RESOLUI~ON OF THE CITY COUNC/L OF ~ CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, R~JESIq2~G THE SUPPORT OF THE SAN
BERNARDINO (IA3WI~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS R~AT/VE TO THE
WHEREAS, the City has always maintained that our Sphere-of-Influence
is vital to the welfare of our community because of geographic location,
i~ter-connection of drainage, circulation, topography, environmental and
service relationships; and
WHEREAS, the city desires to foster the expeditions and logical
annexation of said Sphere-of-Influence; and
WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors has expressed
interest in fostering improved sub-regional and local cooperation in planning;
WHEREAS, the opportunities are not present to enable a coordinated
approach to land use and development in the Sphere; and
WHEREAS, the City desires consistency in development patterns and
regulations between the City's Sphere-of-Inf%uennce and the City; and
WHEREAS, the City feels that the dichotumy between County and City
development regulations, policies, and standa~ encourages developers to play
one against the other, therefore, frustrating any annexation attempts; and
WHSRFAS, it is in the public interest to ensure environmentally, as
well as economically sound planning for the Sphere-of-Influence; and
WHEREAS, the annexation of said Sphere is a key factor to the
successful moderation of density, use of compatible development standards,
coordination of infrastructure facilities and ultimate development of the
WHEREAS, the city and the County have been working toward the CC~T~n
goal of excellence in plann~ for the city's Sphere-of-Influence, as most
recently demonstrated by prepaz-ation of a City Etiwanda North Specific Plan
and a County Etiwanda North Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does
hereby resolve as follows:
1. The City requests the cooperation and consent of the
County in annexing all County-~wned land within
Rancho Cucamonga' s Sphere-of-Influence;
2. The City requests the Board of Supervisor's support
for the city's efforts to annex the remainder of its
northern Sphere;
Resolution No. 91-155
Page 2
3. The County grant to the City, through a cooperative
agreement, review and processing of all planning and
develoImuent proposals (with all requisite processing
fees) within the S~ere-of-Influence, while having
the County retain its approval authority;
4. The City urges the Board of Supervisors to adopt a
position that all development within the Rancho
Cucamonga Sphere-of-Influ~ be required to follow
and adhere to all development standards and policies
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and
6. The Board of Supervisors consider a suspension of
development approvals and processing in the City's
Sphere-of-Influence until the County' s Etiwanda
'North Specific Plall is adopted.
PASSED, APPROVt~, and ADO~ this 5th day of June, 1991.
Buquet, Stout, Williams, Wright
ABSENT: None
Dennis L. Stout, Mayor
Deara J. City Clerk
Resolution ~o. 91-155
Page 3
I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY crFRK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 5th day of
June, 1991.
Executed this 6th day of June, 1991 at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
The foregoing instrument is a correct
copy of the original on file in this
office.
ATTEST: --..-~¢1(' ("c , 19 ¢//
· DEBRA J. ADAMS
·
City Cl~k, Rancho Cucamonga, Calif.
UNDERSTANDENG AND WORKING
WITH LAFCO
The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is a State-created
agency which exists in every County in California except San Francisco.
The Commission is responsible for working closely with citizens, the
County, cities, and special districts on a variety of issues conqerning
jurisdictional change.
LAFCO's statutory purposes include the discouragemere of urban sprawl
and the encouragement of orderly governmental boundaries based upon
local cffcumstances and conditions.
We hope you find the following information helpful in understanding
and working with LAFCO.
FEBRUARY 1997
SAN BERNARDINO
Local Agency Formation Commi.qsion
175 West Fifth Street, Second Floor
San Bernardino, California 92415-0490
(909) 387-5866
FAX: (909) 387-5871
FIRST, THE LAW...
CORTESE-KNOX LOCAL GOVERNMENT
REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1985
(Government Code Section 56000 et seq.)
As of January 1986, LAFCO's powers,
responsibilities and authority are all defined and
described within a single act. The Cortese-Knox
Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985
represents a compilation and simplification of the
three acts that previously mandated LAFCO and
its activities, the District Reorganization Act (DRA), the
Municipal Reorganization Act (MORGA), and the
Knox-W~sbet Act.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONM~'NTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA)
(Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.)
LAFCOs are subject to CEQA, which articulates
environmental policies for the State of California. It
also sets forth requirements for environmental
documents and public participation in the
environmental review process.
CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE
LAFCOs are respomible for commencing property tax
negotiations among agencies affected by a change of
org~ni~,ntion, and for establishing the amount of
property tax revenues to be distributed to new cities
BROWN ACT
(Governmere Code Section 54960 et seq.)
LAFCO hearings, and notices of those hearings, are
subject to the Open Meeting Law contained within the
'Ralph M. Brown Act.'
-2-
NEXT, THE COMMISSION...
The San Bernardino LAFCO consists of seven voting members:
· Two members of City Councils (selected by the mayors of all cities in the County).
· Two members of the Board of Supervisors (selected by the entire Board).
· Two members of independent Special Districts (selected by the Presidents of all the independent special
districts in the County).
· A member representing the general public (selected by the other six LAFCO members).
There are also alternate city, county, special districts, and public members who vote whenever a regular member
is absent or disqualified from participation on an item. Regular and alternate members serve a term of four
years. Commission members are:
CITIES' MEMBERS:
SUPERVISORS' MEMBERS:
SPECIAL DISTRICTS'
MEMBERS:
PUBLIC MEMBER:
Diane Williams, Councilmember, Rancho Cucamonga
Jim Bagley, Councilmember, Twentynine Palms
Jon D. MikeIs, Second District
Denni.~ Hansberger, Third District
Humberto "Bert" Lugo, 'Victor Valley Water District
Oliver P. Roeruer, West San Bernardino County Water District
i. Schuilins
ALTERNATES:
Bob Colyen, Big Bear City CSD, Special Districts Member
Jerry Eaves, Fifth District, Sul~rvi~rl~ Member
John Longvil~, Mayor, Rialto, City M~nber
Richard P. lal~,gm, Public
The Commi.~sion meets on the third Wednesday of every month at 9:00 a.m. in the Hearing Chambers at 175
West Fifth Street, Second Floor, San Bernardino, California.
Under the law, the Commission is authorized to appoint an Executive Officer who shall conduct its day-to-day
business and prepare staff reports and recommendations on proposals submitted to LAFCO. Staffing patterns
differ throughout the State, falling into one of two categories: the "independent" LAFCO where staff are
employees of LAFCO itself; and the "dependent" LAFCO where staff are employees of the County, usually
associated with the Chief Admini.qrative Office, Plmnnir~g Departme/R, or CoRllty Clerk's Office.
-3-
The San Bernardino LAFCO is 'independent,' and its staff includes the following:
EXECUTIVE OFFICER:
LAFCO ANALYSTS:
CLERK TO THE COMMISSION:
LAFCO SECRETARY:
James M. Roddy
Cecilia Lopez-Henderson
Kathleen Rollings-McDonald
Debby Chamberlin
Michelle R. Rutt
REGULATORY POWERS AND DUTIES . . .
LAFCO, as a regulatory body, is respomible for "the discouragement of urban sprawl and the encouragement of
the orderly formation and development of local agencies." In meeting its responsibilities, LAFCO is obligated to
"review and approve or disapprove, with or without amendment, wholly, partially, or conditionally," proposals
for:
· Annexation of territory to cities or special districts.
· Exclusion of land from cities or special districts.
The consolidation of two or more cities, or two or more special districts formed under the same
principal act.
· The formation of new special districts and the incorporation of new cities.
· The dissolution of special districts and disincorporation of cities.
· The merger of cities and special districts.
Reorganizatiom which involve boundary changes to two or more cities or special districts as pan of one
proceeding.
· Review of city or special district contracts for service outside their boundaries.
In addition to these review powers, the Commission has the authority to initiate and make studies of existing
governmental agencies, which may include inventorying such agencies. As of July 1, 1994, based upon the
findings of its special studies, the Commission has the authority to initiate proposals for consolidation of special
districts, the merger of a special district with a city, the dissolution of a special district, the establishment of a
subsidiary special district, or a reorgnni~,ation which includes any of these outlined changes.
FACTORS LAFCO MUST
CONSIDER...
' When LAFCO approves the annexation of territory to a city or special district, it must do so without imposing
any conditions that would regulate land use or subdivision requirements. However, there are specific factors
which must be considered in the review of a proposal. These are specified in Section 56841 of the Government
Code, and include, but are not limited to:
· Land area and land use.
· Topography, natural boundaries, and drainage basins.
· Population, population density, and proximity to other populated areas.
The likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and unincorporated areas
during the next ten years.
The effect of the proposed action and of alternate actions on adjacent areas, mutual social and economic
interests, and the local governmental structure of the County.
· The need for organi:,ed community services.
· The present cost and adequacy of governmental services and conu~ls in the area.
· Probable future needs for such services and controls.
Probable effects of the proposal and of altemativea on the cost and adequacy of services and controls in
the area and adjacent areas.
(As used, "services" is to be ~ as referring to g, ov~'llm~tal services, including.
necessary public facilities, whether or not the searices are such as would be provided
by the local agencies under LAFCO's jurlsdictiom)
Conformity with appropriate city or coumy general and speci~ plato.
The "sphere of influence" of any local agency which may be applicable to ~e proposal being reviewed.
· Per capita assessed valuation.
The definiteness and certainty of the boundaries of the territory, the non-conformance of proposed
bonmtaries with lines of assessment or ownership, the creation of islmuts or corridors of unincorporated
territory and other similar matters affecting the proposed boundary.
The conformity of the proposal and its anticipated effects with ~ Commi.,.sion policies on
providing planned, orderly efficient patterns of urban development.
-5-
CONDITIONS...
LAFCO is empowered by State law to apply a broad range of "conditions" to proposals that it considers and
approves. As indicated in Section 56843 of the Government Code, these include:
· The payment of a determinable amount for the acquisition of existing properly.
· The levying or f~xing and the collection of special or extraordinary taxes, assessments or service charges
for payment for acquired property.
· Disposition of responsibility for outstanding bonds or contractual obligations as well as the amount of
responsibility.
· The formation of new improvement district(s).
· The annexation to or detachment from existing improvement district(s).
· The incurring of liability or bonded indebtedness on behalf of the territory annexed or the Agency as a
whole.
· The issuance and sale of bonds.
· The acquisition, improvement, disposition, sale, transfer,. or division of property.
· The fLxing of use or right-of-use in any public hnpmvement, facility, or property.
· The disposition of any office, department, or board within the affected agellcy or agencies.
· The disposition of employees affected by a propreal.
· The designation of a succe~zor agency to any agency exfinguisbed by actions taken.
· Determination of the method for selection and file number of members for an agency formed or
reorganized.
· Determinations for the initiation, conduct, or completion of proceedings.
· The fixing of the effective date for any change.
· The continuation or provision of any service provided or authorized by the Agency.
· The levying of a benefit assessment or the calling of an election to' decide a special tax.
Any other matters necessary or incidental to the items listed above.
-6-
SPHERES OF INFLUENCE . . .
In addition to being a regulatory agency, LAFCO is also a planning agency charged by the State Legislature with
the responsibility for determining "spheres of influence" for each local agency under its jurisdiction.
A sphere of influence is "a plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency." Section
56425 of the Government Code specifies factors that must be considered in determining the spheres of influence
of each city and special district:
· The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands.
· The present and probable need for public facilities and s~rvices in the area.
The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services which the agency provides or is
authorized to provide.
The existence of any social or economic commtmities of interest in the area if the Commition
determines that they are relevant to the agency.
HOW YOU CAN BE INVOLVED...
As a member of the public, you can be involved in the issues and concerns with which LAFCO deals.
You are welcomed and encouraged to attend regular LAFCO meetings and provide testimony during the public
hearings on specific proposals before the Commition. In addition, the meetings provide an excellent opporumity
for citizens to famili:*rize themselves with the growth, development, and interjurisdictional issues facing their
Private citizem ~ may be appointed as public members of the Commition. Selected by the other six members
of the Commission, public members serve four-year terms and may be reappointed.
-7-