A local agency formation commission may alter the boundaries of a proposed new city beyond those drawn by incorporation proponents, according to a state attorney general's opinion.
Deputy Attorney General Taylor Carey issued the opinion at the request of Sacramento County, which has concerns about the proposed incorporation of Arden Arcade. Specifically, the incorporation proposal excludes areas outside the county's Arden Arcade community planning area between the American River and Fair Oaks Boulevard. County officials are concerned because the exclusion of that area would create a thin peninsula of territory that would remain the county's service responsibility.
Arden Arcade is an unincorporated area of roughly 12 square miles and 95,000 people just east of the City of Sacramento. Proponents submitted incorporation petitions in February 2007. Their proposal excluded the mostly residential strip south of Fair Oaks Boulevard where political support for creating a new city appears to be weak, said Peter Brundage, executive officer of the Sacramento County Local Agency Formation Commission (Sacramento LAFCO). County officials insist the new city must include all of the community planning area, so they requested the attorney general's opinion.
The attorney general's office concluded that while the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act "does not expressly authorize a LAFCO to change the boundaries of a proposed incorporation," the act does authorize a LAFCO to approve or reject an incorporation "with or without amendment."
"Naturally, a LAFCO's authority to change proposed boundaries is not without limitation. To begin with, the act requires that any amendment to a proposal be ‘consistent with written policies, procedures and guidelines adopted by the commission,'" Carey wrote, citing Government Code § 56375 subdivision (l). "Additionally, a LAFCO may not amend a proposal in a way that changes the fundamental nature of the proposal.
"Within these limits, there may be any number of reasons why a LAFCO would consider changing the boundaries of a proposed incorporation area. … "[A] LAFCO may change the boundaries of a proposal to prevent ‘an overlap of service responsibilities and inefficiencies in service provision' or to ‘bring about a unified and accountable government.' Indeed, these purposes lie at the heart of the policy that underlies the entire local government reorganization scheme," Taylor continued, citing Curtin's California Land Use and Planning Law and Fallbrook Sanitary Dist. v. San Diego Local Agency Formation Com., 208 CalApp.3d 753, 765 (1989).
Three new cities have been established in Sacramento County since 1997 — Citrus Heights, Elk Grove and Rancho Cordova. For Citrus Heights, Sacramento LAFCO did some "minor tweaking" to shrink the boundaries, Brundage said. The commission excluded larger chunks from the proposed Elk Grove and Rancho Cordova city limits. With Arden Arcade, the commission might expand the boundaries.
However, Brundage emphasized, the commission placed the incorporation proceedings are on hold in June while cityhood proponents raise money to pay for an environmental impact report and fiscal analysis. The process could resume next year with the goal of placing incorporation on the ballot in November 2010, he said.
The attorney general's opinion is No. 07-206 and was published on June 27, 2008.
Claims that Sacramento County violated the California Environmental Quality Act while approving a commercial development have been dismissed by the Third District Court of Appeal because the project opponent did not submit a written request for a hearing within 90 days of filing a lawsuit.
The attorney for opponent Forster-Gill, Inc., argued that a telephone call to the court clerk within the 90-day period was adequate, but the appellate court disagreed, ruling that the law "plainly contemplates a written request that can be, and is, filed with the court."
The California Supreme Court has accepted yet another California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) case for review, this one involving the question of whether denial of a conditional use permit extension is subject to CEQA. In an unrelated matter, the court has dismissed a Proposition 218 case regarding assessments for a business improvement district.
Denial of a conditional use permit renewal is a "project" requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act, the Third District Court of Appeal has determined. The court ruled for the owner of an airport in Sacramento County whose application for a conditional use permit (CUP) renewal was denied by the county Board of Supervisors without any environmental review.
A proposed subdivision that undergoes environmental review and receives approval does not become a new project for California Environmental Quality Act purposes merely because the local government's approval expires and a new subdivision map is submitted, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.
A logging plan and endangered species permit that were part of the Headwaters Forest deal approved by the state in 1999 have been invalidated by the state Supreme Court. The court set important precedents by rejecting both a "sustained yield plan" and an "incidental take" permit held by Pacific Lumber Company.
A case involving Santa Cruz County's second unit ordinance has been returned to the Sixth District Court of Appeal by the state Supreme Court because the county has amended the ordinance.
The county has asked the court to dismiss the case entirely because the county has eliminated the ordinance provisions in question, Deputy County Counsel Dwight Herr said. Those provisions dictate rent levels and who may occupy a second unit.
An unusual Coastal Commission mitigation fee to offset the impact of a private seawall has been upheld by the Sixth District Court of Appeal, which rejected arguments that the fee was unconstitutional, was prohibited by the Coastal Act and was the result of post hoc rationalization.
An irrigation district that provides wholesale electricity may not begin providing retail electric service without approval of the Local Agency Formation Commission, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled.
In a related decision, the Third District also ruled that the irrigation district may not depose two members and the executive officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the district's lawsuit regarding denial of the retail electricity service application. Both decisions bolster the authority and integrity of LAFCOs.
The owner of an affordable apartment complex in Sacramento may pursue a breach of contract lawsuit against the state Department of Housing and Community Development over a rent increase that the state rejected, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled.
The state Supreme Court and the Third District Court of Appeal appear to be feuding over a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) case concerning the water analysis for a 20,000-housing unit project in Rancho Cordova.
The water supply analysis for one of the largest housing developments ever approved in the Central Valley has been rejected by the state Supreme Court. The court faulted the water study in the environmental impact report for the 20,000-unit Sunrise-Douglas community plan outside Sacramento because the study did not adequately describe long-term water sources and the impacts of using those sources.
Sacramento County properly used 1997 conditions as the baseline for the environmental review of an airport project, even though the general aviation airport had been operating and growing without county permits since the early 1970s, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled.
