AgdaPkt 2006-05-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

NEW BILL INTRODUCED TO ADDRESS LEVEE FUNDING AND PROPOSITION 218 Assemblymember John Laird introduced ACA 1996. This measure established stricter proce- 30 this week, a new approach to raising revenue dural requirements on assessments and changed at the local level for levee improvements and the rule from "majority protest" to a standard maintenance. election, where the assessment procedure would end if the "no" votes outnumbered the "yes" votes. ACA 30 would provide that, for purpose of imposing an assessment or increasing an existing Some levee districts have been successful in assessment to maintain, operate, repair, relocate, gaining approval for levee assessments, but not or upgrade a flood control levee which was in many. Some districts have said that Proposition existence before November 6, 1996 (the date of 218 made it virtually impossible for them to raise the enactment of Proposition 218), the so called funds for the operation, maintenance, or improve- "majority protest" requirements for adoption would ment of their levees. be used. That is, laws governing adoption of such assessments that were in effect prior to Proposi- It is generally recognized that California's levee tion 218 would apply for levees that existed at that system is in dismal shape and in need of upgrade time. It would only go into effect if the Legislature and ongoing maintenance - not only for those agrees to place it on the ballot. Which general communities already behind the levees, but for election ballot will depend upon when the Legisla- those areas that cannot urbanize without levee ture approves the measure. upgrades. For example, "underseepage" has been identified as a threat to "old" levees and it is ACA 30, which will be strongly supported by inappropriate for levees originally built for agricul- the League, represents a new approach to giving tural to be used to "protect" urbanizing areas local governments more flexibility in raising rev- without upgrades. enue to upgrade, operate and maintain levees. ACA 13 (Harman), which would exempt flood It is also important to recognize that levee control and storm water fees from the voter failures in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River approval requirements of Proposition 218, has delta have water quality, water supply and eco- been languishing in committee, given the reluc- nomic impacts that may have statewide effects tance of many Republican members to vote for it beyond the local or regional levee break situation. - remember, a bill to change to Proposition 218 The delta provides over 23 million people with requires a 2/3 vote of the Legislature to move to it drinking water and the levees throughout the valley the ballot. and delta ensure that fresh water from the Sierra Nevada flows through the delta to pumps and then ACA 30 is more narrowly drafted than ACA 13 into millions of homes in Southem California. - it does not include storm water and takes a different approach to the voter approval exemption While the League will strongly support ACA 30 in ACA 13. Nevertheless, it still will be an uphill in its current form, we will explore with the battle to pass ACA 30 - even in light of the state's author's office whether storm water fees can also ongoing flood threat and the recognition that our be included. ACA 30 will be heard in the Assembly levee system is in great need of repair. Local Government Committee Wednesday May 10. All cities, whether in northern or Southern According to the author's office, most of California, should write letters to their California's levees were constructed, operated, or Assemblymembers to support ACA 30. Position: maintained under the "majority protest" rule for Support; Status: Assembly Local Gov't May 9; raising funds that existed prior to the enactment of Staff: Yvonne Hunter. Proposition 218. Proposition 218 was enacted in Visit the League's Official Website--www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS - PAGE 5 May 5, 2006 - Issue #18 -,~"_..._.._,_.."._'_."""'"'"-"~ ,~-~ ._"-