AGENDA FOR MEETING OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION

                 COMMISSION FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO BE HELD IN

                   ROOM 381B OF THE KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION

                      500 WEST TEMPLE STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

                                                    WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2002

                                                                      9:00 A.M.

 

AGENDA POSTED:   April 19, 2002

 

1.         CALL MEETING TO ORDER

2.         Pledge of Allegiance will be led by Chairman Henri f. Pellissier.

 

3.         HEARINGS

 

a. Hearing on a request from the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County to amend the Sphere of Influence for County Sanitation District No. 32.
 

b. Hearing on Annexation No. 261 to County Sanitation District No. 32 – 156.091 acres located on Hasley Canyon Road, approx. three miles west of the Golden State Freeway, in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.  The landowner is the Hasley Ranch Company.

c. Hearing on the Special Reorganization of the San Fernando Valley and presentation of the Executive Officer’s Report and consideration of terms and conditions. 

 
4.    PROTEST HEARING

 

a.  Protest hearing on the Detachment of the entire City of Bell Gardens from the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District.

 

5.     SPECIAL ITEMS

 

a.                   Consideration of the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03.

 

b.                  Reappointment of Carol Herrera, by the Los Angeles County City Selection Committee, as the city representative on LAFCO, for a four year term ending May 1, 2006.

 

c.                   Special Reorganization Update.

 

 

6.     APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

            a.         Minutes for the April 10, 2002 Regular Commission Meeting.

 

7.      PUBLIC COMMENT

 

This is the opportunity for members of the public to address the Commission on items that are not on the posted agenda, provided that the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of the Commission.  Speakers are reminded of the three-minute time limitation.

 
8.      NEW BUSINESS

 

This is the opportunity for commissioners to discuss matters not on the Posted Agenda (To be Discussed and upon Commission approval placed on the Agenda for Action at a Future Meeting).

 

9.         SETTINGS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS

 

The following items will be scheduled for the May 8, 2002 Commission meeting:

           

a.         County Sanitation Districts Annexations.

10.       ADJOURMENT MOTION


STAFF REPORT

 

APRIL 24, 2002

 

SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT

COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 32

 

AGENDA ITEM NO. 3(a)

 

 

The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County is a coalition of special districts that serve the wastewater treatment and solid waste management needs of approximately five million people in Los Angeles County.  The Districts’ service area covers approximately 792 square miles and encompasses 78 cities as well as unincorporated territory within Los Angeles County.

 

County Sanitation District 32 was formed on March 23, 1965, to serve Valencia, Newhall, and Castaic.  The district now operates, jointly, under a Joint Powers Agreement with District 26, a regional system known as the Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System (SCVJSS).  The SCVJSS, an interconnected network of approximately 39 miles of trunk sewers, one pumping plant, and two water reclamation plants, serves the wastewater treatment and disposal needs of the valley.

 

Originally, District 32’s service area encompassed 8.3 square miles.  However, through annexations, it now serves a total area of 23.8 square miles.  The majority of the district’s territory lies within the boundaries of the City of Santa Clarita.

 

The proposal before you today is a request to amend the Sphere of Influence (SOI) boundary for District 32 to take in approximately 28,770 acres [Exhibit 1, Areas 1, 2, 3 and 4].  The subject area encompasses 195 single-family homes, 14 mobile homes, 1 mobile home park (112 units), 2 industrial buildings, 3 commercial buildings, 4 agricultural farms, and 46 miscellaneous parcels (i.e. government parcels, misc. pump plant, etc).  The population is approximately 899, with 488 registered voters.  The majority of the territory subject to the sphere amendment is located in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County, with a small portion located within the boundary of the City of Santa Clarita.

 

The proposal was initiated as a result of a request to annex territory located outside District 32’s boundary [See Agenda Item No. 3(b)].  Because this proposal would require an amendment to the District’s SOI boundary prior to annexation, district staff, in consultation with LAFCO staff, decided it would be more efficient to request an amendment to the entire SOI boundary.  This would eliminate the need to piecemeal SOI amendments with each annexation application involving territory outside the District SOI boundary.


There is a small portion of Newhall Ranch that is located within the existing SOI boundary of District 32.  Newhall Ranch is an immense project, which encompass a large area and it is proposed that a new County Sanitation District be formed, with its own SOI boundary and wastewater management facilities.  For this reason, the district has requested that that portion of Newhall Ranch be excluded from the existing SOI boundary for District 32. [See Exhibit 1]

 

Conversely, the Stevenson Ranch project (Specific Plan Phase V) has been incorporated in the boundary of the SOI request.  It should be noted that the Stevenson Ranch does not naturally drain towards District 32, however, the Stevenson Ranch Development Plan indicates that they will use lift stations to convey wastewater to district facilities. [See Exhibit 1]

 

Recommended Action

 

1.                  Acting in its role as a responsible agency, with respect to the proposed amendment to the sphere of influence and under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15096, LAFCO certifies that it has independently considered and reached its own conclusions regarding the environmental effects of the project and the 2015 Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewage System Facilities Plan and associated EIR certified by the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSD) and has determined that the document adequately addresses the environmental impacts of the project.  LAFCO finds that it has complied with the requirements of CEQA with respect to the process for a responsible agency, and hereby adopts by reference the EIR previously prepared by the CSD in connection with the certification of that document for the project.

 

2.                  Approve the requested amendment to the Sphere of Influence for County Sanitation District No. 32, excluding that portion of Newhall Ranch currently located within the boundary of the district, and make the following determinations:


 a.         Present and planned land uses in the area:

The Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan Land Use designations for the territory within the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County consists of Open Space (O), Hillside Management (HM), Floodway/Floodplain (W), Nonurban (N1), Nonurban 2 (N2), Industry (M), Urban 1 (U1), Urban 2 (U2), Urban 3 (U3), and Significant Ecological Areas (S).  The City of Santa Clarita’s General Plan land use designation for the portion of the territory within the City is Commercial.

 

 b.         Present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area:

The Santa Clarita Valley is one of the fastest growing areas in the County and the requested amendment is necessary to provide wastewater management services to the growing population.

 

   c.         Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides or is authorized to provide:

The District is capable of treating 19.1 mgd (million gallons per day).  It currently treats an average annual flow of 16.95 mgd.  The SCVJSS allows the district to expand to 34.1 mgd.  The District expects to expand to 28.1 mgd by the year 2003 (an increase of 9 mgd) and to the maximum capacity of 34.1 by the year 2010 (an increase of 6 mgd).

                       


STAFF REPORT

 

APRIL 24, 2002

 

ANNEXATION NO. 261 TO

COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 32

 

AGENDA ITEM NO. 3(b)

 

 

This is an uninhabited annexation involving 100 percent landowner consent.  The proposal encompasses 156.091 acres of territory, generally located on Hasley Canyon Road, approximately three miles west of the Golden State Freeway, within the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.  [Exhibit 2]

 

The territory will be developed into 67 single-family homes.  The land use in the surrounding area consists of scattered single-family homes to the north and vacant territory to the south, east and west. The landowner is the Hasley Ranch Company.

 

The County of Los Angeles Department of Regional Planning (RPD), in compliance with State Guidelines, has approved a negative declaration for the project, which also included approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 44645, Conditional Use Permit 87-303 and Oak Tree Permit 87-303.  RDP has further determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment.

 

Based on the information provided by the property owner, County Sanitation Districts has determined that its sewerage facilities have or, in accordance with current policy, will have adequate capacity to collect, treat, and dispose of the wastewater anticipated to be generated as a result of the proposed annexation.

 

All affected agencies have agreed to the negotiated exchange of property tax revenues.

 

Conclusion

 

This proposal indirectly relates to Agenda Item No. 3(a), in that the subject territory is contained within the boundary of the proposed sphere of influence amendment.  Therefore, if Agenda Item No. 3(a) is not approved, the Commission is required to amend the sphere of influence boundary for County Sanitation District 32 prior to approval of this proposal.

 

Recommended Action

 

1.                  Subject to approval of Agenda Item No. 3(a):

 

2.                  Acting in its role as a responsible agency, with respect to the proposed annexation and under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15096, LAFCO certifies that it has independently considered and reached its own conclusions regarding the environmental effects of the project and the negative declaration certified by the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning (RPD) and has determined that the document adequately addresses the environmental impacts of the project.  LAFCO finds that it has complied with the requirements of CEQA with respect to the process for a responsible agency, and hereby adopts by reference the Negative Declaration previously prepared by the RPD in connection with the certification of that document for the project.

 

3.                  Find that all owners of land have given written consent to the change of organization, and all affected agencies have consented in writing to the waiver of protest proceedings, and waive the protest proceedings in its entirety;  and

 

4.                  Adopt resolution making determinations and ordering Annexation  No. 261 to County Sanitation District No. 32, subject to the following term and condition:

 

The property so annexed shall be subject to the payment of such service charges, assessments or taxes as the County Sanitation Districts may impose.


STAFF REPORT

 

APRIL 24, 2002

 

 

PROTEST HEARING ON THE DETACHMENT OF

CITY OF BELL GARDENS

FROM THE BELVEDERE GARBAGE DISPOSAL DISTRICT

 

AGENDA ITEM NO. 4(a)

 

 

On March 27, 2002 the Commission adopted the requisite resolution making determinations and approving the detachment of the entire City of Bell Gardens from the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District.  The purpose of the hearing before you today is to allow interested parties to submit written/and or oral commentary to the proceedings.

 

As previously reported, the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District currently provides refuse, recyclable materials, and green waste collection services to the City of Bell Gardens through a contract with a private waste hauler, Waste Management, Inc.  The District’s operation is primarily financed through the collection of a Garbage Collection and Disposal Service Fee imposed on each parcel of real property within the District, with a supplement of ad valorem property tax received as a special district. 

 

The District’s current contract with Waste Management, Inc. has been extended, on a quarterly basis, through June 30, 2002.

 

The City Proposal

A Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued by the City of Bell Gardens for the provision of garbage disposal services, which included a Summary of the Specifications and Conditions.  Garbage-related services will occur on a weekly basis, commencing on July 1, 2002.  This date corresponds with the expiration of the contract with the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District.

 

The city will assess landowners at a rate sufficient to provide the required services.    Should the City need an increased rate in order to provide the required services it will have to comply with the requirements of Proposition 218. 

Recommended Action

 

1.      If protests have been filed, instruct the Executive Officer, pursuant to Government Code Section 57076,  to determine the value of protests filed and not withdrawn and report back to the Commission with recommendations; or

 

2.      If no protests have been recorded, make a finding that there are no protests and adopt a resolution ordering the detachment of the entire City of Bell Gardens from the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District, subject to the following terms and conditions:

           

a.       The fee previously authorized and levied by the Belvedere Garbage Disposal District shall be levied by the City of Bell Gardens.

b.      No assets of the District shall transfer to the City

c.       The City shall not be apportioned any liabilities of the District.

d.      The detachment will remain subject to a new condition being imposed prior to June 30, 2002, to reflect the agreement by the parties as to the “fair” allocation of assets and liabilities to the City.

e.       The effective date of the detachment shall be July 1, 2002.


 

STAFF REPORT

 

APRIL 24, 2002

 

CONSIDERATION OF PROSED BUDGET FOR FY 2002-03

 

AGENDA ITEM NO. 5(a)

 

Discussion:

 

Local Agency Formation Commission's (LAFCO's) are State of California created commissions that are independent of the respective County's they represent.

 

The Cortese - Knox - Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (C-K-H) established a new funding apportionment mechanism. Effective July 1, 2001 the County of Los Angeles is obligated to fund 38.5%; the City of Los Angeles is obligated to fund 15.4%. The remaining 87 cities in the county are obligated to fund 23.1%, and the special districts are obligated to fund 23.1%. See Allocation of Operating Expenses attached hereto.

 

The attached letter dated April 16, 2002, including attachments, has been forwarded to all 88 cities, 57 independent special districts and the County of Los Angeles.

 

Prior Year Comparison:

 

The F/Y 2001/2002 Operating Budget estimated a Net Operating Cost of $977,274.00. The F/Y 2002/2003 Operating Budget estimates a Net Operating Cost of $781,457.00 which is $195,817.00 less than F/Y 2001/2002. This reduction in net operating cost is

comprised primarily of reductions in Employee Benefits and Capital Costs expenditures.

 

See LAFCO Proposed Budget for F/Y 2002/2003 attached hereto.

 

Allocation among Public Agencies:

 

County of Los Angeles                                     38.462%                      $300,563.95

City of Los Angeles                                          15.385%                      $120,227.14

87 Other Cities                                                 23.077%                      $180,336.81

57 Independent Special Districts                        23.077%                      $180,336.81

Total Allocated Costs                                       100.000%                    $781,464.71

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.                  It is recommended that the commission set May 22, 2002 at 1:00 p.m., as the hearing date to consider adoption of the Final 2002/2003 LAFCO operating Budget.


Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000

 

LAFCO BUDGET F/Y 2002-2003

ALLOCATION OF OPERATING EXPENSES

 

Government Code Section 56381 and Section 56381.6 establishes the formula to be used in allocating LAFCO's operational costs among the county, cities and special districts. Application of said formula is as follows:

 

1.                  The LAFCO commission has a total of 15 members (9 regular and 6 alternates).

 

2.                  There are 2 commission public members (1 regular and 1 alternate) that are appointed by the other voting members of the commission and not by any class of public agency that appoint members to the commission.

 

3.                  Therefore, a total of 13 members are appointed by public agencies that appoint members to the commission.

 

4.                  Therefore, LAFCO's operational costs are to be allocated in proportion to the number of members selected by each class of public agency divided by the13 total appointed members.

 

5.                  As the County of Los Angeles appoints a total of 5 members, comprised of 3 board members (2 regular and 1 alternate) and 2 public members representing the San Fernando Valley (1 regular and 1 alternate), the County's proportionate share of costs will be 5/13ths or 38.462%.

 

6.                  As the City of Los Angeles appoints a total of 2 members (1 regular and 1 alternate), the City of Los Angeles' proportionate share of costs will be 2/13ths or 15.385%.

 

7.                  As the remaining 87 cities appoint a total of 3 members (2 regular and 1 alternate), their proportionate share of costs will be 3/13ths or 23.077% divided among the 87 cities.

The cities' share shall be apportioned in proportion to each city's total revenues, as reported in the most recent edition of the Cities Annual Report published by the Controller, as a percentage of the combined city revenues within a county, or by an alternative method approved by a majority of cities representing the majority of combined cities' populations.

 

8.         As the Independent Special Districts appoint a total of 3 members (2 regular and 1 alternate), their proportionate share of costs will be 3/13ths or 23.077% divided among the 57 independent special districts. The independent special districts' share shall be apportioned in proportion to each district's total revenues, as reported in the most recent edition of the Financial Transactions Concerning Special Districts published by the Controller, as a percentage of the combined districts revenues within a county, or by an alternative method approved by a majority of agencies, representing the majority of their combined populations.