HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - September 19, 2007 K-04AGENDA ITEM �rq
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Update on the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
Draft Policiesand Procedures.
MEETING DATE: September 19,2007
PREPARED BY: Randy Hatch, Community Development Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Update on the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) Draft Policies and Procedures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: LAFCO is governed by State regulations the most recent of
which is contained within the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
(Act). The Act requires LAFCO to adopt written policies and procedures and to act consistent with
those policies and procedures. LAFCO has drafted such policies and procedures and held a
workshop to receive comments. Comments were received from Cities, and other interested parties.
A revised Draft dated August 17, 2007 was prepared which addresses some of the comments made
(see attached).
A number of Lodi Staff concerns were addressed by the revised Draft and are no longer a concern.
Staff remains concerned about proposed policies regarding "Procedural Guidelines for Determining
Sphere of Influence" page 2. Item 4 "Open Space and Rural Lands" seems to discourage the
inclusion of open space and rural lands within a Sphere of Influence if such land is not planned for
development. Some flexibility to this guideline maybe considered if "the agency can demonstrate that
a preservation plan can effectively preserve such lands within an agency's sphere". Staff is
concerned with this language in that it could inhibit the City's option to include non -developable lands
within our sphere to establish and maintain greenbelts or community separators. Under item 5 on
page 3 community separators are encouraged so LAFCO does recognize the value of community
separators.
The Draft Policies and Procedures does include the new concept of "Areas of Interest" (page 4) which
would allow LAFCO to create some level of interest among a geographic area beyond a sphere with a
particular city. This may be used to help create and maintain Greenbelts and Community Separators
or some level of relationship between an area and a city. The problem with this "Area of Interest" is
that little real control or influence is achieved. The Draft guidelines say another agency (i.e. the
County) shall give "great weight" to the comments of the City for which this land is designated as an
"Area of Interest". However, "great weight" is undefined and may not mean much.
LAFCO held a public hearing on the Draft Policies and Procedures on Friday, August 17, 2007. Staff
raised these questions regarding using a sphere of influence to develop and maintain greenbelts and
Community Separators and what does an "Area of Interest" really mean and submitted written
comments (see attached). LAFCO continued the public hearing to September 21, 2007 with no
comments or action being taken.
APPROVED: 7)
Blair K WCity Manager
On September 12, 2007 the various planning directors within the County met with the LAFCO Interim
Executive Officer, James Glaser. Planning Directors from all cities except Lathrop were in
attendance. Mr. Glaser spoke to various city concerns. Specifically addressing Lodi's concerns as
noted in the August 16, 2007 letter, he clarified that open space and agriculturally designated lands
may be included within a Sphere of Influence if a city can demonstrate it has approved a preservation
plan to preserve such lands in open space or agricultural use. We discussed the use of agricultural
easements, transfer of development rights and provision of some limited utility services as elements
of such a possible preservation plan. Mr. Glaser stated that these elements may indeed qualify as a
preservation plan and in fact, he was trying to accommodate Lodi when he drafted this language.
We also discussed the concept of an "Area of Interest" and he did agree to add languageto clarify the
intent of such "Areas" and how it can be used to designate exclusive relationship to a city. Such
language is being drafted by LAFCO and is not available at the writing of this communication but will
be available at the council meeting.
Staff intendsto attend the September 21,2007 LAFCO meeting to reinforce the understanding and
new languageoffered by Mr. Glaser.
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: N/A
Randy ch
Community Development Director
RNlkjo
Attachment: San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission —Policies & Procedures
CITY COUNCIL
BOB JOHNSON, Mayor CITY OF L O D I
JOANNE MOUNCE,
Mayor Pro Tempore Community Development Department
LARRY D. HANSEN
SUSAN HITCHCOCK CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
PHIL KATZAKIAN P.O. BOX 3006
LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(209) 333-6711 1 FAX (209) 333-6842
www.lodi.gov
Thursday, August 16,2007
San Joaquin Local Agency formation Commission
1860 East Hazelton Avenue
Stockton, CA 95205
Subject: Draft Policies and Procedures
Dear Chair Mow and Members of the Commission
BLAIR KING, City Manager
RANDI JOHL, City Clerk
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
City Attorney
The City of Lodi appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Draft Policies and
Procedures. On behalf of the City of Lodi, I have reviewed the Draft dated July
20, 2007, the revised Draft dated August 17, 2007, various comment letters from
cities and interested parties, and the executive officers report and analysis.
First, a number of Lodi's concerns were addressed by the revisions of the August
17, 2007 Draft and are no longer a concern. However, Lodi is deeply concerned
with the policies and procedures as they relate to Sphere of Influence. As part of
our on-going General Plan Update, Lodi is concerned with our sense of
community, economic viability and preserving and enhancing our agricultural base
and growing wine related industry. Key to these City goals and objectives is the
ability of Lodi to have a meaningful influence regarding potential development and
land uses adjacent to and surrounding Lodi. A Sphere of Influence is a State
recognized method by which Lodi can achieve these goals and objectives and
would necessarily include areas that, while they may not be designated for urban
development, are part of our social and economic community. Furtherto aid and
promote agriculture and wine related industry, Lodi currently does provide and
may continue to expand, infrastructure and utility services into this area.
I am concerned about proposed policies regarding "Procedural Guidelines for
Determining Sphere of Influence" page 2. Item 4 "Open Space and Rural Lands"
seems to discourage the inclusion of open space and rural lands within a Sphere
of Influence if such land is not planned for development. Some flexibility to this
guideline may be considered if "the agency can demonstrate that a preservation
plan can effectively preserve such lands within an agency's sphere". I am
concerned with this language in that it could inhibit Lodi's option to include non -
developable lands within our Sphere to establish and maintain agricultural areas
or community separators. Under item 5 on page 3 community separators are
encouraged so LAFCO does recognize the value of community separators. Clear
and explicit language needs to be added to recognize that a Sphere may be large
enough to include such lands.
The Draft Policies and Procedures does include the new concept of "Areas of
Interest" (page 4) which would allow LAFCO to create some level of interest
among a geographic area beyond a Sphere with a particular city. This may be
used to help create and maintain agricultural areas and Community Separators or
some level of relationship between an area and a city. The problem with this
"Area of Interest" is that little real control or influence is achieved. The Draft
guidelines say another agency (i.e. the County) shall give "great weight" to the
comments of the City for which this land is designated as an "Area of Interest".
However, "great weight" is undefined and may not mean much. If this concept of
an "Area of Interest" is to be enacted clear power and influence must be
established for the designated city. A strengthened "Area of Interest" may be
used by a city to do long range infrastructure planning knowing that their efforts
would not be rendered void by a neighboring city's annexation plans or by
unincorporated urban level development. I urge you to establish enhanced
powers and authorities for a designated city and it's "Area of Interest".
Thank you for the opport6nity to share Lodi's concerns with you.
Sincerelv.
ri f I.
Rand; Hatch
Community Development Director
City of Lodi
RHlkic
SAN JOAQUIN
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION
COMMISSION
POLICIES
AND PROCEDURES
DRAFT
August 17,2007
Office (209) 468-3198
Fax (209) 468-3199
www.sjgov.org/lafco
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Soheres of Influence
Spheres of Influence 1
A. Procedural Guidelines for Determining Spheres of Influence 2
B. Sphere of influence Plan 4
C. Amendments and Updates of Spheres 5
II. Service Review Policies
A. General Standards 7
B. Specific Municipal Service Review Requirements 8
C. Public Participation and Public Hearings 11
D. CEQA Requirements 11
111. Annexation Policies and Procedures Uncludina Reorganizations)
General Standards for Annexation and Detachment 12
City Annexations 14
D R A F T
August 17,2007
SPHERES OF INFLUENCE
The San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission is required to adopt a sphere
of influence for each local governmental agency within its jurisdiction. A sphere of
influence is defined as a "plan for the probable physical boundaries and service area
of a local agency as determined by the Commission" (Government Code Section
56076). A sphere is primarily a planning tool that provides guidance in reviewing
individual proposals. Inclusion within an agency's sphere does not indicate that an
affected area automatically will be annexed; an adopted sphere of influence is only
one of several factors the Commission must consider in reviewing individual
proposals (Government Code Section 56668).
The sphere of influence process is perhaps the most important planning function
given to LAFCo by the State Legislature. San Joaquin LAFCo shall use Spheres of
Influence to:
1. Promote orderly growth and urban development.
2. Promote cooperative planning efforts among cities, the county and special
districts to address concerns regarding land use and development
standards, premature conversion of agriculture and open space lands,
efficient provision of services, and discouragement of urban sprawl.
3. Serve as a master plan for future local government reorganization by
providing long range guidelines for efficient provision of public services.
4. Guide consideration of proposals and studies for changes of organization
or reorganization.
While LAFCo encourages the participation and cooperation of the subject agencies,
Sphere of Influence Plans are a LAFCo responsibility and the Commission is the
sole authority as to the sufficiency of the documentation and the Plan's consistency
with law and LAFCo policy.
In determining a sphere of influence, the Commission is required to consider and
make written determinations with respect to the following factors (Government Code
Section 56425):
1. The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and
open space lands.
2. The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the
area.
Dated: 08/17/07 - 1 -
3. The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services
that the agency provides or is authorized to provide.
4. The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the
area if the Commission determines that they are relevant to the agency.
A. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING SPHERES OF
INFLUENCE
1 -Timeframe: Territory that is currently receiving services from a local
agency, or territory that is projected to need a local agency's services
within a 0-20 year timeframe may be considered for inclusion within an
agency sphere. "Sphere horizons" or planning increments should depict
the agency's logical boundary at a time period of between 5 and 10 years
and at the end of the 20 year time period.
2. Consistency Required: Territory will not be considered for inclusion within
a City's sphere of influence unless the area is included within the city's
general plan land use element. The adopted sphere of influence shall
also, efleet-consider City and County general plans, growth management
policies, annexation policies, resource management policies, and any
other policies related to ultimate boundary area of an affected agency
unless those plan or policies conflict with the legislative intent of the
Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Act (Government Code Section 56000 et seq.).
Where inconsistencies between plans exist, LAFCo shall rely upon that
plan which most closely follows the legislature's directive to discourage
urban sprawl, diFeet development away fron wkn agriaultural land and
and encourage the orderly formation and development
of local governmental agencies based upon local conditions and
circumstances.
3. General Plan Approach: LAFCo would f-ave-r-rp efer a sphere of influence
proposal where the city has adopted general plan policies, implementing
ordinances and programs that address: smart growth principles; infill and
redevelopment strategies to minimize conversion of open
space/agricultural land; mixed use and increased densities; community
buffers; and habitat, agriculture and open space preservation strategies.
4. Open Space and Rural Lands: Territory not in need of urban services,
including open space, agriculture, recreational, rural lands, or residential
rural areas shall not be assigned to an agency's sphere of influence
unless the area's exclusion would impede the planned, orderly and
efficient development of the area. Open space and agriculturally
Dated: 08/17/07 - 2 -
des,io fated lands as a'esicinated by the acol INJ aaenctF may be
considered for inclusion within a sphere if the agency can demonstrate
that a preservation plan can effectively preserve such lands within the
agency's sphere.
5. Community Separators: Sphere of influence boundaries shall, to the
extent pessiblefeasible, maintain a separation between existing
communities to protect open space and agricultural lands and the identity
of an individual community.
6. Regional Housing Needs: The sphere of influence plans for cities should
consider the agency's policies and approaches to meet its fair share of
regional housing needs.
7. Districts and Cities: LAFCo shall encourage districts and cities to develop
plans for the orderly detachment, merger/dissolution of a district when
districts have significant territory within a proposed city's sphere of
influence.
8. Types of Spheres:
a. A special district that provides services, which ultimately will be
provided by another agency, will be assigned a zero sphere.
b. If additional information is necessary to determine a sphere
boundary, but is currently unavailable, a partial sphere may be
approved and a special study area may be designated.
c. A local agency may be allocated a coterminous sphere if there is no
anticipated need for the agency's services outside its existing
boundaries, or if there is insufficient information to support inclusion
of areas outside the agency's boundaries in the sphere of influence.
9. Sphere Hierarchy: Where an area could be assigned to the sphere of
influence of more than one agency providing needed service, the following
hierarchy shall apply dependent upon ability to serve, unless an agency or
district has specialized capacity to provide such service:
a. Inclusion within a municipality sphere of influence.
b. Inclusion within a multipurpose district sphere of influence.
C. Inclusion within a single -purpose district sphere of influence.
Dated: 08/17/07 -3 -
10. Areas of Interest: LAFCo may, at its discretion, designate a geographic
area beyond the sphere of influence as an Area of Interest to any local
agency.
a. Areas of Interest is a geographic area beyond the sphere of influence
in which land use decisions or other governmental actions of one
local agency (the "Acting Agency") impact directly or indirectly upon
another local agency ("the Concerned Agency").
b. Within each Area of Interest there is to be no more than one city.
C. LAFCo will notify any Concerned Agency when LAFCo receives
notice of a proposal of another agency in the Area of
Concern/Interest and will give great weight to its comments.
d. LAFCo encourages agencies to provide advance notice to other
agencies of any action or project being considered within the Area of
Interest and commit to considering any comments made by the other
agency.
11. Adoption and Revision: LAFCo will adopt a sphere of influence after a
public hearing and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 56427
of the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Act. Sphere actions are subject to the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. A sphere of
influence shall be updated every five years or more often if deemed
necessary by the Commission. Whenever possible, city sphere updates
shall be scheduled to coincide with City General Plan updates.
B. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE PLAN
The Sphere of Influence Plan for each governmental agency within San
Joaquin LAFCo jurisdiction shall contain each of the following:
1. Present and planned land uses in the area including agricultural and open
space lands.
a. A map defining the probable 20 year boundary of its service area and
defining the agency's sphere horizons at the end of the 5-10 and 20 -
year time period coordinated with the Municipal Service Review.
b. Maps and explanatory text delineating the following:
(1.) Present land uses including improved and unimproved
development, agricultural lands and open space areas.
Dated: 08/17/07 - 4 -
(2.) Propose future use of the area.
2. The present and probable need for public facilities and services (i.e., water
sewer. drainage. police and fire) for the sphere including the need of all
types of major facilities not just those provided by the agency.
3. The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services
that the agency provides or it's authorized to provide.
4. Identification of any social or economic communities of interest.
5. A phasing plan for annexation of territory in the sphere of influence that is
time -coordinated (5-10 and 20 vear time oeriod) and consistent with the
Municipal Service Review.
6. Existing and projected population at the various sphere horizons.
C. AMENDMENTS AND UPDATES OF SPHERES
1. Amendments and Updates Defined: Amendments generally involve
dis6rete changes to a Sphere of Influence Map or Plan that are proposed
by an agency or individual to accommodate a specific proposal. An
amendment may or may not involve changes to the Municipal Service
Review of the agency.
Updates generally involve a comprehensive review of the entire sphere of
influence, including the map and Municipal Service Review.
2. Amendments Required: An amendment to the Sphere of Influence Plan
will be required in the following circumstances:
a. When an agency seeks to add new territory or remove territory from its
sphere.
b. When an agency seeks to move territory already within its sphere from
one sphere horizon to another.
c. When a district seeks to provide a new or different function or class of
service.
d. When an agency proposes a significant change in its plans for service
which makes the current Municipal Service Review inaccurate.
Dated: 08/17/07 -5 -
43. Precedence of Amendments over Annexations: Sphere of influence
amendments shall precede consideration of proposals for changes of
organization or reorganization. Proposals may lhe ccrosiv`ePed 2"t
I t
y=am-, meeting.
.64. Consistency Required: Amendment proposals must be consistent with an
updated Municipal Service Review.
E�5. Demonstrated Need Required: An application for amendment to a sphere
of influence must demonstrate a mer+� rk obabie need or (in the case
of reduction of the sphere) lack of need or capacity to provide service.
:.....�..:.:��..::: -I -
86. Sphere of Influence Amendment and Update Procedures: As required by
Government Code Section 56425, each request for sphere amendment or
update must be heard in a public hearing and is subject to the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Dated: 08/17/07 - 6 -
- r :
r :
43. Precedence of Amendments over Annexations: Sphere of influence
amendments shall precede consideration of proposals for changes of
organization or reorganization. Proposals may lhe ccrosiv`ePed 2"t
I t
y=am-, meeting.
.64. Consistency Required: Amendment proposals must be consistent with an
updated Municipal Service Review.
E�5. Demonstrated Need Required: An application for amendment to a sphere
of influence must demonstrate a mer+� rk obabie need or (in the case
of reduction of the sphere) lack of need or capacity to provide service.
:.....�..:.:��..::: -I -
86. Sphere of Influence Amendment and Update Procedures: As required by
Government Code Section 56425, each request for sphere amendment or
update must be heard in a public hearing and is subject to the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Dated: 08/17/07 - 6 -
.MM
August 17,2007
SERVICE REVIEW POLICIES
The Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
requires LAFCo to conduct service reviews prior to establishing or updating spheres
of influence. A service review is a comprehensive review of services within a
designated geographic area intended to obtain information about municipal or
agency services. Its purpose is to evaluate the provision of services from a
comprehensive perspective and recommend actions, when necessary, to promote
the efficient provision of those services. The service reviews are intended to serve
as a tool to help LAFCo, the public and other agencies better understand the public
service structure and evaluate options for the provision of efficient and effective
public services. LAFCo must have a current Municipal Service Review (MSR) that
demonstrates that the agency can provide adequate and efficient services to the
areas included within the agency's sphere.
A. GENERAL STANDARDS
1. Guidelines: The Municipal Service Review Guidelines (August 2003)
prepared by the State Office of Planning and Research shall be used as a
from k. background for preparing service reviews for a jurisdiction or
agency.
2. Timeline: The service review must present information on future
projections and plans tied to the 5-10, and 20 -year sphere horizons of the
Sphere of Influence Plan, so that service information can be clearly tied to
the plan. In the case of cities, a shorter timeframe may be appropriate if
the applicable General Plan has a shorter planning period remaining when
the service review is prepared.
3. Adequate Services Required: The service review must demonstrate that
adequate services will- can be provided within the time that the inhabitants
of the area will need them.
4. Completion Date: Initial Service Reviews should be completed by January
2008 and will be reviewed and updated as necessary but no later that
every five years in conjunction with or prior to Spheres of influence
reviews and updates. Minor amendments to a Sphere of Influence, as
determined by LAFCo, may not require a service review. Service reviews
may need to be updated independent of a Sphere of Influence review, as
determined by LAFCo, to facilitate review of a pending application or other
LAFCo action.
Dated: 8/17/07 - 7 -
5. Identification of Land Uses: The Service Review must identify existing
land use and give a reasonable projection of land use, which would occur
if services were provided consistent with the MSR.
6. Consistency Required: Service reviews must be internally consistent and
consistent with any overlapping jurisdiction.
7. Existing Resources: Use of existing information resources, technical
support from the county, cities and special districts when available and
adequate shall be used to reduce processing costs and improve the
timeliness of the reviews.
8. Affected Agencies: Service reviews will cover a range of services that a
public agency provides or is authorized to provide (i.e. fire, water, sewer,
police, and storm water). General government services such as social
services and criminal justice need not be addressed. Agencies that are
required to have SOIs and require service reviews include: cities (7),
special independent districts (104), and dependent districts (45).
Countywide districts (i.e., San Joaquin County Resource Conservation
District, San Joaquin Mosquito and Vector Control) will not require
preparation of service reviews.
9. Organization of Service Reviews: A service review may be conducted for
sub -regional areas within the county or on a countywide basis, it may
review a single agency or multiple agencies and it may review a single
service or multiple services. LAFCo will determine how service reviews will
be organized and conducted in San Joaquin County.
10. Information Sharing: LAFCo encourages collaboration, cooperation and
information sharing among service providers and encourages public
participation in the process.
11. City Services Plans: City Services Plans used in conjunction with a
proposed change of organization shall be e^^o, tenon conformity with the
MSR.
12. Cross -county MSRs: LAFCo will work together with other County
LAFCo's to develop a schedule and plan for managing cross -county
MSRs.
B. SPECIFIC MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS:
The focal point of the service review process lies with the preparation of written
statements of determination regarding the agency's ability to provide services.
Dated: 8/17/07 - 8 -
Determinations cannot merely cite some broad policy statement from the
General Plan or recite a series of actions that might be undertaken. The
determinations need to be declaratory statements that arrive at a conclusion
based of all of the information and evidence presented to the Commission. The
determinations need to bridge the gap between raw data and the final
conclusion about the status or condition of the service that is under review.
The Commission needs this information to determine the appropriateness of
the sphere.
The Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Act requires LAFCO to make written evaluations
on nine categories. The following is a brief description of the determination and
the standard for which the service will be review:
Determination 1: Infrastructure needs or deficiencies
Refers to the status of existing and planned public facilities and its relationship
to the quality and levels of service that are, can and need to be provided.
Infrastructure needs and deficiencies can be evaluated in terms of supply,
capacity, condition of facilities] and service quality with correlations to
operational, capital improvement] and finance plans. Maps and explanatory text
that clearly indicate the location of existing facilities and proposed facilities,
including a plan for the timing and location of new or expanded facilities need to
be included. The identification of the anticipated service level needs to be
tailored to the 5-10, and 20 -year sphere horizons.
Determination 2: Growth and Population projects for the affected area
The need for, and patterns of, service provision should be determined by
existing and anticipated growth patterns and population projections. The
municipal service review will evaluate whether projections for future growth and
population patterns are integrated into an agency's planning function. This
analysis will be used to determine whether the sphere boundaries reflect
expected growth boundaries. Consideration should be given to the impact on
growth/land use patterns for adjacent areas, on mutual or regional social and
economic interests, on open space and agricultural land, and on the
government structure of the county.
Determination 3: Financing constraints and opportunities
A community's public service needs should be viewed in light of the resources
available to fund the services. The MSR will need to evaluate factors that affect
the financing of necessary improvements and whether agencies are capitalizing
on financing opportunities and collaborative strategies to deal with financial
constraints.
Determination 4: Cost avoidance opportunities
LAFCo's role in encouraging efficiently provided public services depends, in
part on helping local agencies] explore cost avoidance opportunities. Cost
Dated: 8/17/07 - 9 -
avoidance opportunities include those that eliminate unnecessary costs derived
from:
► Duplication of services and facilities;
► High administration to operational cost ratios;
► Reliance on outdated or deteriorating infrastructure and equipment
underutilized equipment or buildings or facilities;
H Overlapping/inefficient service boundaries;
► Lack of economies of scale; and
H Increasing profitable outsourcing
Determination 5: Opportunities for rate restructuring
The MSR will review agency rates and charges for public services and examine
opportunities for rate restructuring without adversely affecting service quality of
service. Rates will be reviewed for rate setting methodologies and conditions
that could impact future rates.
Determination 6: Opportunities for shared facilities
The service review should identify opportunities for jurisdictions to share
facilities and resources creating a more efficient service delivery system.
Sharing facilities and utilizing excess capacity in another agency's service
system works to avoid service duplications, reduces costs, and minimizes
unnecessary resource consumption. The service review will need to inventory
facilities within the study area to determine if facilities are currently being
utilized to capacity and whether efficiencies can be achieved by
accommodating the facility needs of adjacent agencies. Options for planning
for future shared facilities and services will also be considered.
Determination 7: Government structure options
The MSR will consider the advantages and disadvantages of various
government structures that could provide public services. San Joaquin LAFCo
encourages local agencies to use service reviews to determine whether
initiation of proceedings for changes of organization and reorganization,
including spheres of influence, would be in order and in the best interests of the
agency and the community it serves. LAFCo will examine efficiencies that
could be gained through: (1) functional reorganizations within existing
agencies; (2) amending or updating spheres of influence; (3) annexations or
detachments from cities or special districts; (4) formation of new special
districts; (5) special district dissolutions; (6) merges or special districts with
cities; (7) establishment of subsidiary districts; or (8) any additional
reorganization options found in the LAFCo statute.
Determination 8: Evaluation of management efficiencies
Management efficiency refers to the quality of public services and the agency's
ability to provide services. Efficiently managed entities consistently implement
plans to improve service delivery, reduce waste, eliminate duplications of effort,
contain costs, build and maintain adequate contingency reserves, and
Dated: 8/17/07 -10-
encourage open dialogues with the public and other public and private
agencies. The MSR will evaluate management efficiency by analyzing agency
functions, operations, and practices as well as the agency's ability to meet
current and future service demands.
Determination 9: Local accountability and governance
In making a determination of local accountability and governance, LAFCO will
consider the degree to which the agency fosters local accountability. Local
accountability and governance refers to public agency decision making and
operational and management processes that: (1) include an accessible and
accountable elected or appointed decision making body and agency staff; (2)
encourage and value public participation; (3) disclose budgets, programs, and
plans; (4) solicit public input when considering rate changes and work and
infrastructure plans; and (5) evaluate outcomes of plans, programs and
operations and disclose results to the public.
C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
LAFCo encourages the early involvement of agencies, the public, and other
stakeholders in development of the service review report. A formal review
period shall be provided and a meeting/workshop with the Commission shall be
held to accept comments from the public and the Commissioners prior to
finalizing the document. The final report shall be available to the public at least
21 days prior to final consideration by the Commission. This public review
period may be in conjunction with the 21 -day notice requirement for the public
hearing. The service review shall be adopted by resolution at a noticed public
hearing. If the municipal service review supports a particular action such as a
sphere of influence update or amendment application, and the required
processes have been complied with, the Commission can take action on the
proposals the same hearing.
D. CEQA DETERMINATION
LAFCo will consider service reviews, as projects for CEQA purposes and will
be processed consistent with the requirements of CEQA and LAFCo's CEQA
procedures.
[Note: At the time of writing this policy, a bill (AB 1263) is pending in the State Legislature
that could revise the Municipal Service Review Determinations. Should this legislation
become law the above policies are intended to reflect any approved revisions.]
Dated: 8/17/07 - 11-
August 17,2007
ANNEXATION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
(Including reorganizations)
GENERAL STANDARDS FOR ANNEXATION AND DETACHMENT
These standards govern LAFCo determinations regarding annexations and
detachments to and from all agencies. The annexations or detachments must be
consistent with the general policies set forth in these Policies and Procedures.
GensisteRgy with Spheres and Municipal Service Reviews
The annexation or detachment must be consistent with the internal planning
horizon of the sphere of influence. The land subject to annexation shall
normally lie within the first planning increment (5-10 year) boundary. The
annexation must also be consistent with consider the applicable Municipal
Service Review. An annexation shall be approved only if the Municipal
Services Review and the Sphere of Influence Plan demonstrates that
adequate services will -can be provided with the timeframe needed by the
inhabitants of the annexed area. If detachment occurs, the sphere will be
modified.
LAFCo generally will not allow spheres of influence to be amended
concurrently with annexation proposals.
Proposed annexations of land that lie outside of the first planning horizon (5-
10 year) are presumed to be inconsistent with the Sphere Plan. In such a
case the agency must first request LAFCo to consider a sphere amendment
pursuant to the above policies. If the amendment is approved, the agency
may then proceed with the annexation proposal. A change of organization
or reorganization will not be approved solely because an area falls within
the SOI of any agency.
As an excection to the presumed inconsistency mentioned above, Master
Plan and Specific Plan developments may span several planning horizons
of the sphere of influence. Annexation of the entire project area may be
desirable in order to comprehensively plan and finance infrastructure and
provide for amenity -based improvements. In these cases, no amendment
of the planning horizon is necessary provided project phasing is recognized
in the Sphere of Influence Plan.
2. Plan for Services
Every proposal must include a Plan for Services that addresses the items
identified in Section 56653 of the Government Code. The Plan for Services
must be consistent with the Municipal Service Review of the Agency.
Dated: 8/17/07 -12-
Proponents must clearly demonstrate that the city or special district is
capable of meeting the need for services.
3. Contiguity
Territory proposed to be annexed to a city must be contiguous to the
annexing city or district unless specifically allowed by statute. Territory is not
contiguous if the only connection is a strip of land more than 300 feet long
and less than 200 wide, that width to be exclusive of highways. The
boundaries of a proposed annexation or reorganization must not create or
result in areas that are difficult to serve.
4. Development Within Jurisdiction
Development of existing vacant or non -prime agricultural lands for urban
uses within the existing jurisdiction or within the sphere of influence ShA
should be encouraged before any proposal is approved which would allow
for or lead to the development of existing open space lands for non -open
space uses which are outside of the existing jurisdiction of the local agency
or outside of the existing sphere of influence of the local agency. (Section
5637 i )
5. Progressive Urban Pattern
Annexations to agencies providing urban services shall be progressive
steps toward filling in the territory designated by the affected agency's
adopted sphere of influence. Proposed growth shall be from inner toward
outer areas.
6. Piecemeal Annexation Prohibited
LAFCo requires annexations and detachments to be consistent with the
schedule for annexation that is contained in the agency's Sphere of
Influence Plan. LAFCo will modify small piece -meal or irregular
annexations, to include additional territory in order to promote orderly
annexation and logical boundaries, while maintaining a viable proposal. In
such cases, detailed development plans may not be required for those
additional areas but compliance with CEQA is required.
7. Annexations to Eliminate Islands
Proposals to annex islands or to otherwise correct illogical distortion of
boundaries will normally be approved unless they would violate another
provision of these standards. In order to avoid the creation of an island or to
encourage the elimination an existing island, detailed development plans
may not be required for the remnant areas.
8. Annexations that Create Islands
An annexation will not be approved if it will result in the creation of an island
of unincorporated territory of otherwise cause or further the distortion cf
existing boundaries. The Commission may nevertheless approve such an
Dated: 8/17/07 -13-
annexation where it finds that the application of this policy would be
detrimental to the orderly development of the community and that a
reasonable effort has been made to include the island in the annexation but
that inclusion is not feasible at this time.
9. Substantially Surrounded
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg
Act regarding island annexation without protest hearings (section 56375.5),
the subject territory of an annexation proposal shall be deemed
"substantially surrounded" if it is within the sphere of influence of the
affected city and two-thirds (66-2/3%) of its boundary is surrounded by the
affected city.
10. Definite and Certain Boundaries
All boundaries shall be definite and certain and conform to lines of
assessment or ownership. The Commission's approval of boundary change
proposals containing split parcels will typically be subject to a condition
requiring the recordation of a parcel map, lot line adjustment or other
instrument to avoid creating remnants of legal lots.
11. Service Requirements
An annexation shall not be approved merely to facilitate the delivery of one
or a few services to the determent of the delivery of a larger number of
services or service more basic to public health and welfare.
12. Adverse Impact of Annexation on the Other Agencies
LAFCo will consider the any significant adverse effects upon other service
recipients or other agencies serving the area and may condition any
approval to mitigate such impacts.
CITYANNEXATIONS
1. Annexation of Streets
Annexations shall reflect the logical allocation of streets and rights of way as
follows:
Territory should be included within the annexation to assure that the
city reasonably assumes the burden of providing adequate roads to the
property to be annexed. LAFCo will require cities to annex streets
where adjacent lands that are in the city will generate additional traffic
or where the annexation will isolate sections of county road. Cities
shall include all contiguous public roads that can be included without
fragmenting governmental responsibility by alternating city and county
road jurisdiction over short section of the same roadway
Dated: 8/17/07 -14-
■ When a street is a boundary line between two cities the centerline of
the street may be used as the boundary or may follow a boundary
reached by agreement of the affected cities.
2. Pre -zoning Required
The Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Act requires the city to pre -zone territory to be
annexed, and prohibits subsequent changes to the General Plan and /or pre -
zoning designations for a period of two years after completion of the
annexation, unless the city council makes a finding at a public hearing
consistent with the provisions of Governments Code Section 56375(e). In
instances where LAFCo amends a proposal to include additional territory, the
Commission's approval of the annexation will be condition upon the pre -
zoning the new territory.
Dated: 8/17/07 -15-