Reviews


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.


CITIES

City of Watsonville (April 2018)
City of Capitola (July 2017)
City of Scotts Valley (October 2016)


FIRE DISTRICTS

Central Fire & CSA 48 / County Fire  (June 2018)
Fire Districts (October 2016)
South County Fire Service Study (June 2007)


WATER DISTRICTS

Felton Water (July 2003)
Please note that the water bill comparisons (Table 23) on page 45 were corrected during the public review process. Contact LAFCO staff to request a copy of the revised table.
Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency (November 2017)
Errata for combined review of Reclamation District & PVWMA
Scotts Valley Water District (October 2016)
Soquel Creek Water District (May 2017)


RECREATION & PARK DISTRICTS


Parks, Open Space & Cultural Services (May 2018)
Recreation & 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.


SANITATION DISTRICTS

Salsipuedes Sanitary District (January 2016)


COUNTY SERVICE AREAS

Road Maintenance CSAs (July 2017)
CSA 9 Public Works (July 2015)
CSA 11 Parks, Open Space & Cultural Services (May 2018)
CSA 12 Septic Maintenance (August 2018)
CSA 38 Sheriff’s Patrol (August 2018)
CSA 54 Summit West Water (July 2017)
CSA 60 Huckleberry Woods (July 2015)


MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS

Pajaro Valley Public Cemetery District (April 2015)
Reclamation District No. 2049 College Lake (November 2017)
Errata for combined review of Reclamation District & PVWMA

Resource Conservation District (July 2015)


COUNTYWIDE SERVICE REVIEW

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 (August 2005)


 

 

“>

Translate »