IMPROVING OVERSIGHT TRANSPARENCY (August 2017)
In 2016, the California Legislative Analyst’s Office released this report:
COMMON CLAIMS ABOUT PROPOSITION 13
SERVICE & SPHERE OF INFLUENCE REVIEWS
LAFCO periodically performs municipal service reviews and updates as necessary, as well as the sphere of influence of each agency subject to LAFCO’s boundary regulations.
The most recent reviews done are:
—Reclamation District No. 2049 College Lake (November 2017)
—Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency (November 2017) Errata for combined review of Reclamation District & PVWMA
—City of Capitola (July 2017)
—Road Maintenance CSAs (July 2017)
—CSA 54 Summit West Water (July 2017)
—Soquel Creek Water District (May 2017)
—City of Scotts Valley (October 2016)
—Scotts Valley Water District (October 2016)
—Fire Districts (October 2016)
—Recreation and Park Districts (March 2016)
Errata: On pages 22 and 23 of the public review draft, the discussion of the operations of the Opal Cliffs Recreation District contains errors concerning the Coastal Commission permits. A staff report was prepared for the 2009 permit, but the permit was never approved by the Coastal Commission.
—Salsipuedes Sanitary District (January 2016)
—CSA 9 Public Works (July 2015)
—CSA 60 Huckleberry Woods (July 2015)
—Resource Conservation District (July 2015)
—Pajaro Valley Public Cemetery District (April 2015)
The Lompico merger with the San Lorenzo Valley Water District was completed on June 1, 2016. The Assessment District will generate $2.75 million to be spent on the water system’s infrastructure, repairs, and improvements in Lompico over the next ten years.
Background Lompico Information:
—Sentinel 6/1/16 merger article
—Assessment Ballot Results
—Average Customer 5-Year Costs Under Merger & Independent Models
—Staff Report for August 6 Hearing
Lompico Merger Options:
—May 22 Presentation
On December 4, 2013, the LAFCO Executive Officer participated in a public workshop concerning the possible merger of the Lompico County Water District and the San Lorenzo Valley Water District.
—December 4 Presentation
GUIDE TO LAFCO LAW
Each year the Legislature publishes a guide to the LAFCO law:
—LAFCO Law 2017
WATER MANAGEMENT IN CALIFORNIA
UC Davis and the Public Policy Institute of California have prepared an insightful article that foresees ten inevitable changes in water management in California.
HISTORY OF LOCAL BOUNDARY LAWS
Peter Detwiler, a long-time analyst working for the State Legislature, has written a history of local boundary laws in California:
—California Within Limits
50 YEARS OF LAFCOS
In 2013, the California Senate Local Government Committee produced a report looking back at 50 years of LAFCO activities and how the public can become involved in the matters now being studied by the 58 LAFCOs.
—50 Years of LAFCOs
MUTUAL WATER COMPANIES
Assembly Bill 54 of the 2011 Legislative Session requires mutual water companies to file their service area boundary maps with LAFCOs by December 31, 2012.
—Santa Cruz County Mutual Water Companies
Assembly Bill 240 of the 2013 Legislative Session requires mutual water companies to conduct open meetings, comply with the Public Records Act, prepare an annual audit, adopt an annual budget at an open meeting, and receive board member training.
LAFCO WATER POLICIES
LAFCO conducted a public hearing and the Commission voted 7-0 to amend and adopt the recommended set of policies.
—Water Policies (adopted February 2, 2011)
EIR FOR UCSC NORTH CAMPUS WATER AND SEWER SERVICE
In August of 2010, the City of Santa Cruz certified a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Extraterritorial Water and Sewer Applications concerning part of the UCSC North Campus:
—North Campus EIR
The 2009-10 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury has titled one section of their final report “Up the Creek without a Financial Paddle: The Lompico County Water District.” State law requires LAFCO to respond to the findings and recommendations of this section.
—Grand Jury Report
—LAFCO Response re: Lompico Water
STATE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
For a state perspective on groundwater issues, see the 2010 Legislative Analyst’s Office report titled “Liquid Assets: Improving Management of the State’s Groundwater Resources”:
The 2008-9 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury has titled one section of their final report “Who is Watching Our Special Districts?”. State law requires LAFCO to respond to the findings and recommendations of this section.
—Grand Jury Report
COUNTY SERVICE AREA LAW
In 2008, the Legislature overhauled the County Service Area Law:
—Report: Serving the Public Interest
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE SERVICE STUDY
LAFCO accepted the South County Fire Service Study on June 6, 2007:
—South County Fire Service Study
MANABE OW BUSINESS PARK
In 2006, a real estate covenant was recorded concerning the Manabe and Ow properties where a business park was being planned in Watsonville.
—Journal Article: A New Tool for the LAFCO Toolbox
COUNTYWIDE SERVICE REVIEW
In August 2005, LAFCO accepted the Countywide Service Review, which evaluates municipal-type services provided by 88 agencies with annual budgets that total more than $240,000,000:
—Countywide Service Review
In 2003, LAFCO evaluated water service options in Felton. Click on the following to link to the study:
—Public Review Draft Felton Water Service Review
Please note that the water bill comparisons (Table 23) on page 45 were corrected during the public review process. Contact the LAFCO staff to request a copy of the revised table.
STATE SENATE EXPLANATION OF LAFCOs
In 2003, the Local Government Committee of the California Senate updated its explanation of how LAFCOs work:
—It’s Time to Draw the Line
MEASURE U, CITY OF WATSONVILLE
In November 2002, 60% of Watsonville City voters approved Measure U. It established a twenty-year, twenty-five-year, and westerly urban limit lines around the City, and directed growth into several unincorporated areas—primarily the Buena Vista, Manabe-Burgstrom, and Atkinson Lane areas adjacent to the current City boundary. The Measure was designed to protect commercial agricultural lands and environmentally sensitive areas while providing a measure of surety to the City on its ability to address housing and job creation for the next 20 years.
On June 4, 2013, the voters of the City of Watsonville voted on Measure T, an amendment to the Urban Limit Line:
—Measure T Initiative
The initiative did not pass.
GROWTH WITHIN BOUNDS
In 2000, the state Commission on Local Governance for the 21st Century issued its report recommending changes in the state laws that govern city, county, and special district boundary
—Growth Within Bounds