01 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton Legislative Platform 2016 n e e L 1400 K Street, Suite 400❑Sacramento, California 95814 L- 1. AiG l L Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 CITIES www.cacities.org March 30,2016 The Honorable Lois Wolk California State Senate State Capitol,Room 5114 Sacramento,CA 95814 RE: SB 1318(Wolk)Local Government:Drinking Water Infrastructure or Services: Wastewater Infrastructure or Services Notice of Opposition,As Amended 3/28/16 Dear Senator Wolk: The League of California Cities is writing to register our opposition to Senate Bill 1318(Wolk).The League is aware of and concerned about certain disparities in services provided to residents and properties located within disadvantaged unincorporated communities(DUCs).While we believe this measure is well intended,it will not result in the necessary changes to community services or facilities;nor does it address the root causes regarding a lack in acceptable drinking and/or wastewater facilities.Our concerns with this measure are outlined below: I. Residents Wanting Service.There is nothing in the bill that explains how LAFCO will determine whether the residents of the DUC want the service. 2. SO1 Changes.The measure says that LAFCO can't approve any SOI change if a DUC exists within or adjacent to a city's sphere of influence,unless the city has entered into an enforceable agreement to provide services to a DUC within 5 years. Exception provided if residents of DUC are opposed to receiving services. This is unworkable for several reasons. It is not possible to enter into an"enforceable agreement"to provide services to a DUC because(a)it would violate Prop 218;and(b)there's no one to enter into the agreement with. Prop 218 requires notice, hearing and/or protest for rates imposed for water or sewer to all communities including a DUC. Lastly,the requirement does not take into consideration the opposition from residents of the DUC to pay for necessary services. 3. Appropriate Provider.The bill does not require any analysis of who might be the most appropriate water/sewer service provider.This further complicates the matter of adjacent communities taking responsibility. 4. No Consideration.The bill does not allow LAFCO to weigh the purpose of the city's request to extend services to the non-DUC area against the goal of providing water/sewer to DUC. 5. Lacking Clarity.The bill doesn't explain the process for determining whether an area lacks adequate water or wastewater services. 35IPage