HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-20-2011 Steering Committee Agenda Packet oJN14 SANIT °" Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Orange County Sanitation District �` 5:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting of the Q 9 Administration Building
Steering Committee Conference Rooms A & B
10844 Ellis Avenue
°'F Fountain Valley, CA
cr"" 'NE E"vQ� (714) 593-7124
AGENDA
DECLARATION OF QUORUM:
PUBLIC COMMENTS: If you wish to speak,please complete a Speaker's Form and give it to the Clerk
of the Board. Speakers are requested to limit comments to three minutes.
REPORTS: The Committee Chair and the General Manager may present verbal reports on miscellaneous
matters of general interest to the Directors. These reports are for information only and require no action by the
Directors.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Approve minutes of the March 23, 2011 Steering Committee meeting.
INFORMATION ITEMS:
2. Public Affairs Report (Gold)
CLOSED SESSION:
During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Board,
the Chair may convene the Board in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate
negotiations,pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters,pursuant to Government Code Sections
54956.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.61 as noted.
Reports relating to(a)purchase and sale of real property;(b)matters of pending or potential litigation;(c)
employment actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or which are exempt from public
disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Board during a permitted
closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as the Board takes final action on
any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information.
04/20/11 Steering Committee Agenda Page 1 of 2
Convene in closed session.
(1) CONFER WITH DISTRICT NEGOTIATORS
(Government Code Section 54954.5(f))
• Agency Designated Representatives: James D. Ruth, General Manager; Robert
Ghirelli, Assistant General Manager; Jim Herberg, Assistant General Manager,
Jeff Reed, Director of Human Resources; and, Richard Spencer, Human
Resources Supervisor.
• Employee Organizations: International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 501
and Orange County Employees Association (OCEA)
Reconvene in regular session.
Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session.
OTHER BUSINESS AND COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF
ANY:
ADJOURNMENT:
The next Steering Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 25, 2011, at 5:00
p.m.
Accommodations for the Disabled: Meeting Rooms are wheelchair accessible. If you require any special disability
related accommodations, please contact the Orange County Sanitation District Clerk of the Board's office at(714)593-
7124 at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Requests must specify the nature of the disability and the type of
accommodation requested.
Agenda Posting: In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2,this agenda has
been posted outside the main gate of the Sanitation District's Administration Building located at 10844 Ellis Avenue,
Fountain Valley,California,not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All public records relating to
each agenda item,including any public records distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting to all,or a majority of
the Board of Directors, are available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk of the Board.
NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for the Committee Meeting, items must be submitted to the
Clerk of the Board 14 days before the meeting.
Lilia Kovac
Associate Clerk of the Board
(714)593-7124
Ikovac(a)ocsd.com
04/20/11 Steering Committee Agenda Page 2 of 2
STEERING COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir.
01/26/2011
AGENDA REPORT Item Number Item Number
2
Orange County Sanitation District
FROM: James D. Ruth, General Manager
Originator: Michael Gold, Public Affairs Manager
SUBJECT: Public Affairs update
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
Information Only
SUMMARY
This report is the monthly Public Affairs Division update that includes legislative and
political information from Washington, D.C. and Sacramento, lobbyists' activities, and
outreach education and communication programs to member cities, employees and the
public.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Federal Legislative Update
Legislative Advocate: Eric Sapirstein, ENS Resources
As Congress continued to wrestle with the fiscal year 2011 budget and prospects for a
federal government shutdown grew, the fiscal year 2012 also began to gather
momentum as Senate and House committees commenced the formal review process of
the Administration's budget request. The drumbeat to reduce federal spending
continues to drive all budget debates; however, the Republican freeze on earmarks and
authorizations may be slowly beginning to thaw. Members are questioning the value of
not legislating renewals of important programs like WRDA that by definition require
project authorizations.
Fiscal Year 2011 Budget
Congress narrowly avoided a government shutdown coming to agreement over the FY
2011 budget. The White House, Republicans and Democrats agreed to $38 billion in
spending cuts and avoided contentious issues such as regulation of greenhouse
gasses. At the time of this report, the exact cuts are unknown. The nature of the debate
set the stage for two key issues facing Congress: the debt ceiling and the FY 2012
budget.
These remaining issues are sure to cause deep divisions and rancor among the
Republican and Democratic base and could cause further gridlock and another threat of
a shutdown.
Page 1 of 9
Fiscal Year 2012 Budget
In theory the FY 2012 budget should be approved by September 30, 2011. House and
Senate committees are reviewing programs (such as State Revolving Loan Fund and
other water quality programs) and deciding spending level. In most years, legislators
seek increases over the prior year's level; however, in both chambers, Members are
seeking significant reductions. For water quality programs, it appears that support for
the Administration's SRF program at $1.5 billion remain, but, other water quality matters
do not enjoy broad based support (such as redefining what waters are subject to
regulation).
Congressman Ryan's introduction in the House for a FY2012 budget blueprint sets the
stage for more partisan rancor and discussion over key EPA programs and funding, as
well as larger budget issues that will dominate the summer. We will keep you informed
on budget discussions and how they impact projects and programs of interest to OCSD.
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
The District complied with Chairman Barbara Boxer's request for WRDA project
submissions and requested up to $5 million in assistance for Santa Ana River aquatic
habitat restoration. The project is aimed at work that the District will need to complete
after the relocation of the SARI line in the Santa Ana River. Our request will be reviewed
in the coming months as part of the Committee on Environment and Public Works'
drafting of a WRDA bill. In the House, no formal process has been established owing in
part to the continued confusion over whether such an authorization would violate the
earmark prohibition. However, congressional staff has indicated that the Chairman of
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, John Mica (FL), is likely to begin
reviewing WRDA options later this summer.
Clean Water SRF Reauthorization
Congressional action to renew the Clean Water Act SRF remains a priority in the
Senate and the House; however, the need to renew the highway transportation law and
to develop a WRDA 2011 bill are of higher priority and will probably delay action on an
SRF rewrite until later this year.
Chemical Security Mandates
Despite a number of Members involved in Homeland Security policy professing a desire
to renew the current chemical security program (CFATS) through a simple extension
that would exempt POTWs from regulation, two key Members have signaled a desire to
capture POTWs in the program and impose new mandates including inherently safer
technology (IST) mandates. In the Senate, Senator Frank Lautenberg (NJ), who sits as
chair of the Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health, has
introduced S. 711 requiring the Department of Homeland Security to assume control
over the regulation of POTWs and to develop regulations requiring the transition from
chemicals deemed hazardous to safer technology as well as mandates to conduct
vulnerability assessments and security upgrades. His House colleague, Henry Waxman
(CA) who is seeking to capture POTWs within the CFATS program, has joined
Lautenberg. However, unlike Lautenberg, Waxman appears to support leaving the
management and oversight of the program within the Environmental Protection Agency.
Page 2 of 9
We did not expect this issue to gain much traction this year but since it appears as
though it might have momentum, we will monitor more closely.
Federal Legislative Outreach
Conflict of Interest Regulation and Appointment to Water Boards
During the past month, the Chair and staff met with Representative Dana Rohrabacher
as a follow-up the meetings during CASA's Washington, D.C. conference. At this
meeting, the issue of the Environmental Protection Agency's discriminatory rule
excluding qualified individuals from sitting on water boards if they or their immediate
family members receive 10 percent of their income from a NPDES permit holder was
discussed.
Mr. Crandall and staff illustrated the problem with the current rule as it impacted a
former District director seeking a position on the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board. Mr. Rohrabacher indicated that the issue was an example of outdated
and unreasonable policy and he agreed to support an effort to revise the rule allowing
qualified people to be nominated and selected to sit on water boards. The District is
working with Rohrabacher and CASA to develop language addressing the issue.
State Legislative Report
Legislative Advocates:
Christopher Townsend, Heather Dion and Casey Elliott, Townsend Public Affairs
State Political Highlights
When Governor Brown unveiled a budget proposal to bridge a $25 billion budget deficit
through a mix of spending cuts and revenue enhancements, he acknowledged that
there was something for everyone to dislike in his proposal. Governor Brown also knew
that California needed a budget proposal that was honest about what actions needed to
be taken in order to eliminate the massive budget deficits that have plagued the State
for the better part of a decade.
Since January, the Administration has been focused on working with the Legislature to
address the State's fiscal situation. While most media accounts have focused on the
issues that divide the Republicans and Democrats in Sacramento, the Legislature has
made significant progress on the budget in recent weeks. In mid-March, the Legislature
passed the main budget bill and a series of trailer bills containing over $11 billion in
budget solutions. On March 24, the Governor signed the measures that included
increased community college fees, smaller welfare-to-work grants and the elimination of
adult day health care.
While progress has been made, several outstanding issues remain because there is no
agreement between the parties. Media attention has focused on placing tax extensions
on a special election ballot and the elimination of local redevelopment agencies
because these are keys to the Governor's plan and they account for over half of the
budget deficit ($14 billion).
Page 3 of 9
Republicans have made it clear that they do not intend to support Governor Brown's
proposal to place tax extensions on the ballot. These tax measures (sales and VLF)
revert to lower levels on July 1 and generate over $12 billion annually for the State.
Despite Republican opposition to his tax extension proposal, the Governor continued to
meet with Republican legislators in hopes of convincing some of them to support his
proposals. Talks between the GOP and the Governor soon broke down as it became
apparent that Brown was not going to be able to meet their demands for a hard
spending cap, large-scale pension reform and modifications to environmental
regulations.
Since the breakdown in negotiations, Democrats have been exploring passing the tax
measures by a simple majority vote or using the initiative process. The Legislative
Counsel has opined that placing a tax measure on the ballot through a majority vote bill
could be done in a manner that does not violate the State Constitution; however,
Democrats, including the Governor, yet to embrace this idea. The primary drawback to
the initiative process is that it would be unlikely that the tax extensions could be placed
before the voters until November, five months into the fiscal year.
Special District Proposals
The Assembly Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review and the
Assembly Committee on Local Government held a joint hearing on the role of Special
Districts in California on March 2. The purpose of the hearing was to investigate
transparency and accountability matters.
According to the State Controller's report, there are currently 4,776 special districts in
California of various sizes and structures and about 85 percent of those special districts
provide a single service to their residents. Members of the Committee questioned
whether consolidation efforts should be pursed in light of perceived duplication and
inefficiency as well as the lack of public participation and knowledge of special
districts. The testimony and discussion acknowledged that special districts represent an
outgrowth of the public desire for a level of service that meets their particular needs and
some were created out of fiscal necessity. The experts and committee members also
acknowledged that consolidation efforts require thoughtful consideration and may not
make sense across the board, but rather require local participation particularly among
individual County LAFCO's.
There was common agreement for more transparency and possible reforms to the
election process for Special Districts; however representatives from the California
Special Districts Association (CSDA) noted that districts already submit annual financial
audits and compensation information to the State Controller.
In closing the hearing, Assemblyman Dickinson noted that any discussion of special
districts' reserves and property tax funding was largely absent from the discussion. The
only mention of this issue was by Assemblymember Martin Garrick (R-74), who argued
that increased financial disclosure requirements must be coupled with recognition that
Page 4 of 9
these reserves are inherently owned by the residents of the special districts, not by the
State.
TPA's Activities for the Month:
• TPA continues to monitor, report, and promote the following state legislative and
advocacy goals:
o Proactive protection of OCSD property tax funding
o Outreach and education, particularly to new members of the legislature, at
both the staff-staff and elected-board member levels.
o Ongoing analysis of legislative measures including but not limited to
environmental mandates that could affect the District's operations, local
government transparency measures, and budget measures redirecting
fees to local wastewater agencies.
o The potential for regulatory streamlining
o Round II of IRWM funding
• TPA is monitoring, analyzing and tracking legislation as it is introduced on behalf
of the OCSD.
• TPA also drafts letters, when appropriate, for OCSD consideration on particular
budget or legislative matters of interest.
• TPA monitors and reports on key committee hearings on the budget and special
districts.
• TPA provides up-to-date briefings on the State budget.
Legislative Outreach
On April 1, Assembly Member Allan Mansoor toured OCSD's facilities with Vice-chair
Edgar and staff.
Also, staff and TPA continue to meet with state legislative district staff to discuss
property taxes and key bills. To date, the following meetings have been scheduled:
• Assembly Member Wagner— April 7, 2011
• Assembly Member Mansoor— March 25, 2011
• Assembly Member Norby — April 18, 2011
• Assembly Member Silva — April 12, 2011
• Senator Harman — April 5, 2011
As directed by the Steering Committee, staff drafted a letter signed by the chair
opposing any property tax shift from Sacramento. The letter is attached.
On April 27, staff will be participating in the CASA Conference in Sacramento and
setting up meetings with legislative staff to discuss our issues.
Public Affairs Update
Grants Update
Staff researched two grants during the past month — climate change grants through the
Bureau of Reclamation (WaterSmart program) and another round of OCTA grants for
Page 5 of 9
storm water capture. After discussing with staff, we determined that these grants do not
apply to wastewater agencies.
Media, Outreach and Education
OCSD volunteers participated in the OC Science and Engineering Fair, an event to
encourage high school students to consider careers in science and engineering. OCSD
judges student entries and we offer two $200 prizes for the junior and senior class
winners.
We also sent volunteers to the Children's Water Festival, as described in the General
Manager's monthly update.
We submitted two press releases this past month: one describing Fountain Valley's use
of our biosolids for recreation area compost to draw attention to our biosolids recycling
and other publicizing our Plant of the Year award from the regional SARBS chapter (as
reported last month).
Also, there was story in a northern California paper advocating that the state take
special district reserve funds to balance the state budget and they cited OCSD's
reserve. The article and our response are attached to this report.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
N/A
CEQA
N/A
BUDGET / DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY COMPLIANCE
N/A
Page 6 of 9
Special districts awash in money should cough up some of it to bail out the state
By Thomas D. Elias
Once again, a logical solution to California's estimated $25 billion budget quandary stares the
state in the face. All the money that would be needed to keep all services going, pay all state
employees and meet pension obligations now sits in government hands.
Back when the budget deficits ran only about $9 billion to $10 billion (those good old days were
only about two or three years ago), it became clear that changing a few of the property
assessment rules adopted to facilitate the 1978 Proposition 13 tax cuts could solve much of the
problem. This could still solve a bit of the problem, but nowhere near all of what it has become.
Meanwhile, cash that now lines the pockets of a bunch of special districts that are generally
unwilling to share their wealth could do almost the entire job. This doesn't include the
redevelopment agencies whose money Gov. Jerry Brown now proposes to tap.
What are these special districts and where do they get their big bucks? We're talking about
water districts, irrigation districts, publicly owned bus companies, sewer districts, sanitation
districts, hospital districts and more. In large part, these outfits get their money from fees, not
taxes. In many places, if you want your garbage collected, you pay the sanitation district. If you
want water to come out of your tap or your garden hose, you pay the water district. If you want
to ride a bus or trolley, you pay the fare.
Altogether, the 250 wealthiest special districts in California had cash holdings of$41.3 billion
entering last year, after paying all expenses. This was money gathered over decades of
operation and sitting in bank deposits or other investments. The Orange County sanitation
district, for one, had "retained earnings" of$1.35 billion. The same county's water district had
$1.2 billion in reserve.
If any city or county possessed that kind of uncommitted cash, taxpayers would be up in arms,
demanding lowered fees and some kind of distribution of the wealth.
When many cities have a bit of extra cash -- nowhere near these sums -- they donate at least
some of it to local schools to help prevent cuts.
But with special districts, there's nary a peep from anyone. Also, little or no movement by their
elected boards to use the extra money for anything helpful. Nope, they'd rather sit on the cash,
pleading possible future infrastructure needs.
Water districts justifiably say they never know when they'll need to repair a burst line that might
create a sinkhole in the middle of a major boulevard. That's happened many times. Money also
must be available for sewer repairs and new buses.
In fact, as reported by the Orange County Register, about half the money is reserved for specific
projects or future debt payments. That still leaves about $20 billion unspoken for. No one knows
how much the districts might eventually need for repairs to buildings and other equipment, but
for sure they won't be spending $20 billion on those items anytime soon. Let's say, choosing a
random figure, that they might eventually need $5 billion for repairs, above and beyond their
planned budgets. That leaves $15 billion they could hand over to the state -- enough to solve 60
percent of this year's original budget problem -- or all of it, now that legislators have passed $14
billion worth of spending cuts.
Page 7 of 9
But the state can't touch the money on its own. It can't dun the districts as it did city
redevelopment agencies over the last two years. It can't eliminate the districts. Any hope the
state ever could demand some of the districts' reserves diminished considerably with last fall's
60-40 percent passage of Proposition 22, which aimed to keep most local tax revenues in local
government hands.
And yet, state government has plenty of power. If they were truly playing hardball, Brown and
the Legislature could threaten to withhold other money from areas where special districts don't
offer some of their reserves to help the state. One thing Brown could do is threaten to withhold
federal grant money of various types that is allocated by the state.
In short, the governor has plenty of jawboning power. If local voters saw other government
services such as police and fire protection, schools and road maintenance begin to suffer while
special districts refuse to contribute toward helping the state as a whole, it's possible they might
rise up and vote out some district board members.
Political reality, then, means special district money may not be as untouchable as some laws
might suggest. It's really a question of how tough the governor and the Legislature choose to
get, whether they want to fight yet another battle.
Thomas D. Elias is a syndicated columnist who writes about state issues. Email him
at tdelias6a�aol.com.
OCSD's response
Mr. Elias argues that special districts, like the Orange County Sanitation District, should be
punished for being fiscally sound and financially prudent by giving our reserve funds to
Sacramento because they have a budget problem. Moreover, the author is misinformed with
respect to what "retained earnings" mean. To gain a better understanding of OCSD's reserve
and why we have it, we are republishing the article below that was written in November:
Why does OCSD have such a large reserve?
First and foremost, the amount OCSD has in reserves is determined by the Board of Directors
and through our sound financial management and policies; OCSD has earned the coveted AAA
bond rating.
The AAA bond rating is the equivalent of a FICO credit score above 800 and it means we can
get the best deals on financing capital projects. As you well know, people with excellent credit
ratings get the best deals on loans and the same is true of high bond ratings —we are able to
finance our debt at the best rates and that translates into long-term savings.
Think of it this way: If two people buy homes on the same block for the same price but one
(with excellent credit) gets a loan at 4% for 30 years and the other gets a loan for 5% for 30
years, the person paying the lower rate spends less over the life of the loan. If the house cost
$500,000 the savings would be $107,000.
Here is another reason for the reserve: we maintain billons ($6.2 to be exact) in assets and
should something happen, we need the resources to get us through an emergency or to cover
expenses on capital projects we did not anticipate.
We all know it is important to have savings to cover unexpected things and as a public agency
we have an obligation to protect the public health and environment and our reserve account is
there for equipment replacement, emergencies or other things not in the budget.
Page 8 of 9
Finally, OCSD is self-insured meaning that we use our reserve fund to cover damages from fire,
earthquake or flood, as well as workers compensation or other general liabilities. The reserve
funds are in addition to our commercial insurance policies and help keep our overall insurance
rates low.
A November 21 article in the OC Register stated that OCSD had retained earnings of$1.35
billion (as of June 30, 2009) with the implication that we're sitting on a pile of cash. Just looking
at the figures in the article might be a bit confusing and have you wondering, "What do those
numbers mean?"
What is retained earnings?
The OC Register article stated that OCSD has retained earnings of$1.35 billion but what does
that mean? Is that all cash? Think of retained earnings as simply as the sum total of everything
we take in, how much we owe and what everything is worth.
For example, let's say you own a house worth $500,000 but you owe $400,000. Now let's say
your total family income each year is $120,000 and total family expenses are $115,000.
When you add up the value of your house and your total income (500,000 + 120,000) then
subtract what you owe and your expenses (400,000 + 115,000). Your"retained earnings" are
$105,000.
Realistically, you don't have $105,000 in cash sitting in your bank account because the figure
includes the equity in your home. Subtracting equity, you have $5,000 in cash at the end of the
year.
The District's balance sheet is similar but on a larger scale because we have lots of equipment,
pumps and pipes as well as buildings. We also collect sewer fees from all the residents and
businesses in Orange County in providing the collection, treatment, and disposal of
wastewater from the 2.6 million people we serve.
As of June 30, 2009, we had about $2.7 billion in total assets including infrastructure, or capital
assets, and our cash and investments. Just so you know, the capital assets are the cash outlays
we've spent on the construction of all building that has occurred over the years, not the
replacement value, or dollar amount of what it would cost to replace these assets today (that
amount is about $6.2 billion).
From this $2.7 billion we add in all of the revenue generated including sewer service fees,
property taxes, and interest income and subtract all of our expenses including salaries and
benefits, utilities, supplies, contractual services, and interest expense paid on our outstanding
debt as well as all of the money we still owe on outstanding bonded debt (the equivalent to your
outstanding mortgage balance at the end of the year) and we arrive at retained earnings of
$1.35 billion as shown in the Register. It doesn't stop there so please stay with us.
Retained earnings is an accounting term that means total assets minus total liabilities, or net
assets. Of the District's $1.35 billion of retained earnings at June 30, 2009, only $535 million is
actually in cash and investments.
This $535 million is our reserve and is comprised of funds set aside for debt service, capital
improvements, self-insurance and cash contingency.
Page 9 of 9
OCSD Legislative Matrix
4/7/2011
AB 83 (Jeffries R) Environment: CEQA exemption: recycled water pipeline.
Current Text: Introduced: 1/5/2011 odf html
Introduced: 1/5/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 1/27/2011-A. NAT. RES.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor I Desk FPolicy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/11/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol Room 447 ASSEMBLY NATURAL RESOURCES, CHESBRO,
Chair
Summary: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to
prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report (EIR)
on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the
environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect.
CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may
have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that
effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect
on the environment. CEQA exempts specified pipeline projects from the above requirements. This bill
would additionally exempt a project for the installation of a new pipeline, not exceeding a specified
length, for the distribution of recycled water within an improved public street, highway, or right-of-
way. Because a lead agency, which may include a local agency, is required to determine whether a
project qualifies for those exemptions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill
contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
AB 89 (Hill D) Retirement: public employees.
Current Text: Introduced: 1/6/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 1/6/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 1/27/2011-A. P.E.,R. &S.S.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 5/4/2011 9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444 ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT
AND SOCIAL SECURITY, FURUTANI, Chair
Summary: The Public Employees' Retirement Law creates the Public Employees' Retirement System,
which provides a defined benefit to its members based on age at retirement, service credit, and final
compensation, as defined. The State Teachers' Retirement Law and the retirement laws for county
employees and city employees also provide for a defined benefit based on age at retirement, service
credit, and final compensation. This bill would specify that, notwithstanding any other law, for the
purposes of determining a retirement benefit paid to a person who first becomes a member of a public
retirement system on or after January 1, 2012, the maximum salary, compensation, or payrate upon
which retirement benefits shall be based shall not exceed an amount set forth in a specified provision
of the Internal Revenue Code.
Position
AB 162 (Smyth R) Local government: financial reports.
Current Text: Introduced: 1/19/2011 odf html
Introduced: 1/19/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 2/18/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal I Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol, Room 447 ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SMYTH,
Chair
Summary: Existing federal law, the Single Audit Act of 1984, requires any nonfederal entity, defined
as states, local governments, or nonprofit organizations, that accepts $300,000 or more in federal
money to prepare an annual audit that meets certain specifications and transmit that audit to
specified federal agencies. Existing law requires the Controller to receive every audit report prepared
by any local public agency pursuant to the federal Single Audit Act of 1984, and that the Controller
review those reports for compliance with federal law before forwarding them to the designated state
agency. This bill would additionally require that, if an audit of a local agency reveals certain financial
irregularities, the findings be sent separately to the Controller immediately after the audit has been
concluded. By increasing the duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local
program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
AB 187 (Lara D) State Auditor: audits: high-risk local government agency audit program.
Current Text: Introduced: 1/25/2011 odf html
Introduced: 1/25/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/31/2011-A. A. &A.R.
2Year Desk Po5c Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law authorizes the State Auditor to establish a high-risk government agency audit
program for the purpose of identifying, auditing, and issuing reports on any agency of the state that
the State Auditor identifies as being at high risk for the potential of waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement or that has major challenges associated with its economy, efficiency, or effectiveness.
This bill would authorize the State Auditor to establish a high-risk local government agency audit
program to identify, audit, and issue reports on any local government agency, including any city,
county, or special district, or any publicly created entity that the State Auditor identifies as being at
high risk for the potential of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement or that has major challenges
associated with its economy, efficiency, or effectiveness. The bill would also authorize the State
Auditor to consult with the State Controller, Attorney General, and other state agencies in identifying
local government agencies that are at high risk.
Position
AB 213 (Silva R) Administrative Procedure Act: notice of proposed actions: local government agencies.
Current Text: Introduced: 1/31/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 1/31/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/5/2011-A. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk I Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: The Administrative Procedure Act governs the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or
repeal of regulations by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by the Office of
Administrative Law. This bill would require an agency, when it considers it appropriate, to mail or to
electronically mail a notice of proposed action to adopt, amend, or repeal a regulation to local
government agencies or local government agency representatives, as defined, that are likely to be
affected by the proposed action, as prescribed.
Position
Support
AB 229 (Lara D) Controller: audits.
Current Text: Amended: 3/30/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/2/2011
Last Amend: 3/30/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/31/2011-A. B.,P. &C.P.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/12/2011 9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 447 ASSEMBLY BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION, HAYASHI, chair
Summary: Existing law requires the Controller to superintend the fiscal concerns of the state. Existing
law requires the Controller to receive every audit report prepared by any local agency to comply with
the federal Single Audit Act of 1984. This bill would require the audit reports prepared in this regard to
be submitted to the Controller within 9 months of the end of the period audited or in accordance with
applicable federal law. This bill would authorize the Controller to appoint a qualified certified public
accountant to complete an audit report if it is not submitted by the local agency within the required
timeframe, with associated costs to be borne by the local agency, as specified. This bill would require
the audit to comply with the Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the
United States. This bill would require the audits to be made by a certified public accountant that is
licensed by the California Board of Accountancy and selected by a local agency from a directory of
accountants to be published by the Controller by December 31 of each year. The Controller would be
required to use specified criteria to determine those certified public accountants that are to be
included in the directory. This bill contains other related provisions.
Position
AB 253 (Smyth R) Local agencies: accounting.
Current Text: Amended: 3/15/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 2/3/2011
Last Amend: 3/15/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/16/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Polic Fiscal I Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Desk
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol, Room 447 ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SMYTH,
Chair
Summary: Existing law requires the Controller to prescribe uniform accounting and reporting
procedures that are applicable to specified types of local agencies, including special districts . This bill
would instead require the Controller to prescribe uniform accounting procedures that are applicable
only to specified types of special districts, subject to these provisions. The bill would require the
Controller to prescribe uniform accounting procedures for cities, subject to specified criteria, in
collaboration with the Committee on City Accounting Procedures, which would be created by the bill.
Position
AB 262 (Harkey R) California regional water quality control boards: boundaries.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/7/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/7/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 2/18/2011-A. E.S. &T.M.
2Year k Polic Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered Des
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/26/2011 Anticipated Hearing ASSEMBLY E.S. &T.M., Not in daily file.
Summary: Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the 9 California regional water quality
control boards are among the principal state agencies that carry out responsibilities relating to water
quality. The act prescribes the boundaries of each regional board. This bill would revise the description
of the boundaries of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and the San Diego Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
Position
Watch
AB 275 (Solorio D) Rainwater Capture Act of 2011.
Current Text: Amended: 3/25/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 2/7/2011
Last Amend: 3/25/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 4/5/2011-A. W.,P. &W.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor FDeskFPolicyFFiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/26/2011 9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 437 ASSEMBLY WATER, PARKS AND
WILDLIFE, HUFFMAN, Chair
Summary: Under existing law, the State Water Resources Control Board (state board) and the
California regional water quality control boards prescribe waste discharge requirements for the
discharge of stormwater in accordance with the national pollutant discharge elimination system
(NPDES) permit program and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Existing law authorizes a
city, county, or special district to develop, jointly or individually, stormwater resource plans that meet
certain standards. This bill would enact the Rainwater Capture Act of 2011, which would authorize
residential, commercial, and governmental landowners to install, maintain, and operate rain barrel
systems, as defined, and rainwater capture systems, as defined, for specified purposes, provided that
the systems comply with specified requirements. This bill contains other related provisions and other
existing laws.
Position
AB 457 (Wagner R) Public works contracts: relief for bidders.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/15/2011 ,df html
Introduced: 2/15/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 2/15/2011-A. B., P. &C.P.
2Year k Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf.1D7
Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 5/3/2011 Anticipated Hearing ASSEMBLY B., P. &C.P., Not in daily file.
Summary: Existing law sets forth the procedures governing the bidding, awarding, and payment of
public works contracts by public entities, and the relief due bidders and contractors under those
contracts. This bill would entitle a bidder who successfully challenges the award of a contract
determined to be invalid due to errors or omissions of the public entity to recover costs and attorney's
fees incurred in pursuing the challenge.
Position
Oppose
AB 512 (Gordon D) Local government renewable energy self-generation program.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/15/2011 pdf html
Introduced: 2/15/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/5/2011-A. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. rro
lled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public
utilities, including electrical corporations, as defined. Existing law authorizes a local government, as
defined, to receive a bill credit, as defined, to be applied to a designated benefiting account for
electricity exported to the electrical grid by an eligible renewable generating facility, as defined, and
requires the commission to adopt a rate tariff for the benefiting account. An eligible renewable
generating facility for the purposes of these provisions is limited to a facility that has a generating
capacity of no more than one megawatt. This bill would expand the definition of an eligible renewable
generating facility for the purposes of these provisions to include a facility that has a generating
capacity of no more than 5 megawatts.
Position
Support
AB 646 (Atkins D) Local public employee organizations: impasse procedures.
Current Text: Amended: 3/23/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/16/2011
Last Amend: 3/23/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/24/2011-A. P.E.,R. &S.S.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/13/2011 9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 444 ASSEMBLY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT
AND SOCIAL SECURITY, FURUTANI, Chair
Summary: The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act contains various provisions that govern collective bargaining
of local represented employees, and delegates jurisdiction to the Public Employment Relations Board
to resolve disputes and enforce the statutory duties and rights of local public agency employers and
employees. The act requires the governing body of a public agency to meet and confer in good faith
regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with representatives of
recognized employee organizations. Under the act, if the representatives of the public agency and the
employee organization fail to reach an agreement, they may mutually agree on the appointment of a
mediator and equally share the cost. If the parties reach an impasse, the act provides that a public
agency may unilaterally implement its last, best, and final offer. This bill would instead provide that if
the parties fail to reach an agreement, either party may request that the board appoint a mediator,
and would require the board, if it determines that an impasse exists, to appoint a mediator at the
board' s expense. The bill would authorize either party to request that the matter be submitted to a
factfinding panel if the mediator is unable to effect settlement of the controversy within 15 days and
declares that factfinding is appropriate. The bill would require that the factfinding panel consist of one
member selected by each party as well as a chairperson selected by the board or by agreement of the
parties. The factfinding panel would be authorized to make investigations and hold hearings, and to
issue subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of
evidence. The bill would require all political subdivisions of the state to comply with the panel's
requests for information. This bill contains other related provisions.
Position
Oppose
AB 741 (Huffman D) Onsite wastewater disposal.
Current Text: Amended: 3/14/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/17/2011
Last Amend: 3/14/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 3/15/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol, Room 447 ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SMYTH,
Chair
Summary: Existing law prohibits the discharge of sewage or other waste, or the effluent of treated
sewage or other waste, in any manner that will result in contamination, pollution, or a nuisance.
Under existing law, when the State Department of Public Health or any local health officer finds that a
contamination exists, the department or the officer is required to order the contamination abated, as
provided. This bill would authorize defined entities to use this provision for the purpose of converting
properties from onsite septic systems and connecting them to the sewer system and for replacing
existing sewer laterals connecting p ipes to a sewer system . This bill contains other existing laws.
Position
Support
AB 849 (Gatto D) Water: use efficiency: graywater building standards.
Current Text: Amended: 3/31/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/17/2011
Last Amend: 3/31/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 4/4/2011-A. H. &C.D.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 9 a.m. - State Capitol, Room 126 ASSEMBLY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT, TORRES, Chair
Summary: Existing law provides that resource conservation is of fundamental importance to the
prosperity and welfare of the people of this state and that the Legislature believes that the state
must assume leadership in formulating and putting into effect a statewide program of water
conservation. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to encourage the
installation and implementation of residential and commercial water use efficiency measures, including,
but not limited to, graywater and storm retention systems, to reduce or eliminate regulatory barriers
for water use and efficiency, and if feasible, to provide incentives to increase investment in and use of
graywater systems. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
AB 955 (Huber D) Onsite sewage treatment systems.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 pdf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/5/2011-A. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, on or before January 1, 2004,
requires the State Water Resources Control Board, in consultation with other entities, to adopt
regulations or standards for the permitting and operation of specified onsite sewage treatment
systems. The act requires the state board to apply those regulations or standards to those systems
commencing 6 months after their adoption. The act requires the regulations or standards to include
exemption criteria established by the California regional water quality control boards. The act requires
the regulations to include minimum operating requirements and requires that the regulations
authorize a qualified local agency to implement the requirements adopted under the act if the local
agency requests authorization. This bill would require the state board to classify onsite sewage
treatment systems into regulatory tiers based on the demonstrated risk each system poses to the
public health and environment. The bill would specify that the exemption criteria to be contained in the
regulations may also be established by the state board in addition to the regional boards. The bill
would delete from the local agency implementation provision the condition that the local agency
request authorization.
Position
AB 964 (Huffman D) State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund: onsite sewer improvement projects.
Current Text: Amended: 3/17/2011 rdf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Last Amend: 3/17/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/21/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law continuously appropriates state and federal funds in the State Water Pollution
Control Revolving Fund to the State Water Resources Control Board to provide financial assistance for
the construction of publicly owned treatment works by a municipality, the implementation of a
specified management program, the development and implementation of a specified conservation and
management plan, and other related purposes in accordance with the federal Clean Water Act and
the state Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. This bill would require financial assistance
provided from the fund for onsite sewer improvements, as defined, to be provided only for projects for
which a public agency has adopted a sewer system management plan, as defined, that includes a
prescribed 10-year plan for sewer upgrades. The bill, commencing January 1, 2014, would require a
public agency receiving financial assistance from the fund for that purpose to report to the board on
its progress with respect to developing and implementing a 10-year plan for sewer upgrades. This bill
contains other related provisions.
Position
AB 1048 (Harkey R) Water quality: recycled water and wastewater: fluoride.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/16/2011-A. E.S. &T.M.
2Year Desk P_o_5 Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/26/2011 Anticipated Hearing ASSEMBLY E.S. &T.M., Not in daily file.
Summary: Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the State Water Resources Control
Board and the 9 California regional water quality control boards are the principal state agencies with
responsibility for the coordination and control of water quality in the state. The act requires the state
board to formulate and adopt state policies for water quality control, and requires the regional boards
to adopt regional water quality control plans in compliance with the state policies. This bill would
require the state board, on or before July 1, 2012, to adopt a statewide policy establishing standards
for levels of fluoride in recycled water and wastewater, as specified. The bill would require the state
board to provide direction to the regional boards to revise their respective regional water quality
control plans to ensure consistency with that statewide policy.
Position
AB 1178 (Ma D) Solid waste: place of origin.
Current Text: Amended: 4/4/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Last Amend: 4/4/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/5/2011-A. NAT. RES.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/25/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol Room 447 ASSEMBLY NATURAL RESOURCES, CHESBRO,
Chair
Summary: Existing law authorizes a city or county to assess special fees of a reasonable amount on
the importation of waste from outside of the county to publicly owned or privately owned facilities.
This bill would also authorize a local agency to assess those special fees. The bill would prohibit a city,
county, or local agency from otherwise restricting or limiting in any way the importation of solid waste
into that city or county based on place of origin because ensuring adequate and appropriate capacity
for disposal of solid waste is a matter of state and regional concern. This bill contains other related
provisions and other existing laws.
Position
Support
AB 1287 (Buchanan D) Local government: audits.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 pdf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 3/21/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Iankp—on—c—ilFiscal Floor Desk Policy
Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law requires school districts to comply with General Accounting Office standards for
financial and compliance audits, as specified, and prohibits an independent auditor from engaging in
financial compliance audits unless, within 3 years of commencing the first of the audits, and every 3
years thereafter, the auditor completes a quality control review in accordance with General Accounting
Office standards. This bill would require local agencies, defined to include cities, counties, a city and
county, special districts, authorities, or public agencies, to comply with General Accounting Office
standards for financial and compliance audits and would prohibit an independent auditor from
engaging in financial compliance audits unless, within 3 years of commencing the first of the audits,
and every 3 years thereafter, the auditor completes a quality control review in accordance with
General Accounting Office standards.
Position
AB 1344 (Feuer D) Local governance.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/21/2011-A. L. GOV.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 1:30 p.m. - State Capitol, Room 447 ASSEMBLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SMYTH,
Chair
Summary: Existing law requires a charter commission to submit, among other things, a city charter to
the voters of a city at either a special election called for that purpose, at any established municipal
election date, or at any established election date, provided that there are at least 88 days before the
election. Existing law also authorizes the governing body of any city or city and county to, among
other things, propose a charter and submit the proposal for the adoption to the voters at either a
special election called for that purpose or at any established municipal election date or at any
established election date, provided there are at least 88 days before the election. This bill would
require a city charter, whether submitted to the voters by a charter commission or the governing body
of the city or city and county, to be submitted at the next established statewide election date,
provided there are at least 88 days before the election. This bill would also require a proposal to
adopt a charter, whether submitted to the voters by a charter commission or the legislative body of a
city or city and county to include in the ballot description an enumeration of new city powers as a
result of the adoption of the charter, including, but not limited to, whether the city council will,
pursuant to an adopted charter, have the power to raise its own compensation and the compensation
of other city officials without voter approval. This bill contains other related provisions and other
existing laws.
Position
AB 1354 (Huber D) Public works: payments: retention.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 3/21/2011-A. B.,P. &C.P.
2Year Desk Poli c Fiscal Floor Polic F Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House 2nd H Desk youse iscal Floor Conf.Conc.
Calendar: 4/26/2011 Anticipated Hearing ASSEMBLY B.,P. & C.P., Not in daily file.
Summary: Existing law authorizes the Department of General Services, or any other department with
authority to enter into contracts, to contract with suppliers for goods and services and for public
works. Existing law provides that a contract entered into no or after January 1, 1999, relating to the
construction of a public work of improvement between the original contractor and a subcontractor or
between any subcontractors thereunder, the percentage of retention proceeds withheld cannot
exceed the percentage specified in the contract between the public entity and the original contractor.
Existing law also prohibits the Department of General Services from making payments upon such
contracts in excess of 95% of the percentage of actual work completed plus a like percentage of the
value of material delivered, as specified, and requires the department to withhold not less than 5% of
the contract price until final completion and acceptance of the project. This bill would delete the
prohibition against payments being made in excess of 95% of the work completed and the
requirement that the department withhold not less than 5% of the contract price until final completion
and acceptance of the project, and would instead prohibit the retention of any amount with respect to
all contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2012, between a public entity and an original
contractor, between an original contractor and a subcontractor, and between all subcontractors
thereunder, relating to the construction of any public work of improvement, as specified.
Position
Oppose
SB 27 (Simitian D) Public retirement: final compensation: computation: retirees.
Current Text: Amended: 3/3/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 12/6/2010
Last Amend: 3/3/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/22/2011-5. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk I Policy Fiscal I Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/11/2011 11 a.m. -John L. Burton Hearing Room (4203)
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS, KEHOE, Chair
Summary: The State Teachers' Retirement Law (STRL) establishes the Defined Benefit Program of the
State Teachers' Retirement System, which provides a defined benefit to members of the system based
on final compensation, credited service, and age at retirement, subject the certain variations. STRL
also establishes the Defined Benefit Supplement Program, which provides supplemental retirement,
disability, and other benefits, payable either in a lump-sum payment, an annuity, or both to members
of the State Teachers' Retirement Plan. STRL defines creditable compensation for these purposes as
remuneration that is payable in cash to all persons in the same class of employees, as specified, for
performing creditable service. This bill would revise the definition of creditable compensation for these
purposes and would identify certain payments, reimbursements, and compensation that are creditable
compensation to be applied to the Defined Benefit Supplement Program. The bill would prohibit one
employee from being considered a class. The bill would revise the definition of compensation with
respect to the Defined Benefit Supplemental Program to include remuneration earnable within a 5-
year period, which includes the last year in which the member's final compensation is determined,
when it is in excess of 125% of that member's compensation earnable in the year prior to that 5-year
period, as specified. The bill would prohibit a member who retires on or after January 1, 2013, who
elects to receive his or her retirement benefit under the Defined Benefit Supplemental Program as a
lump-sum payment from receiving that sum until 180 days have elapsed following the effective date of
the member's retirement. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
SB 31 (Correa D) Local government: lobbyist registration.
Current Text: Amended: 3/23/2011 odf htmi
Introduced: 12/6/2010
Last Amend: 3/23/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/31/2011-S. E. &C.A.
2Year Dk Polic Fiscal Floor Desk Policy es Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Summary: The Political Reform Act of 1974 provides for the comprehensive regulation of lobbyists, as
defined. This bill would enact a comprehensive scheme to regulate lobbying entities, as defined, that
lobby local government agencies, including requirements to register and make periodic reports
regarding certain lobbying activities. The bill would require each local government agency to create a
commission to implement and enforce the provisions of the bill. By requiring local government agencies
to implement a new program, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill contains
other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
SB 46 (Correa D) Public officials: compensation disclosure.
Current Text: Amended: 4/6/2011 ndf html
Introduced: 12/9/2010
Last Amend: 4/6/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/6/2011-S. G. &F.
2Year Desk UP— Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/27/2011 9:30 a.m. - Room 112 SENATE GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE, WOLK, Chair
Summary: Existing provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974 require certain persons employed by
agencies to file annually a written statement of the economic interests they possess during specified
periods. The act requires that state agencies promulgate a conflict of interest code that must contain,
among other topics, provisions that require designated employees to file statements disclosing
reportable investments, business positions, interests in real property, and income. The act requires
that every report and statement filed pursuant to the act is a public record and is open to public
inspection. This bill would, until January 1, 2019, require every person , except a candidate for public
office, who is required to file a statement of economic interests to include, as a part of that filing, a
compensation disclosure form that provides compensation information for the preceding calendar year,
as specified. This bill would, until January 1, 2019, require each designated employee who is required
to file statements under a conflict of interest code to include, as a part of that filing, a compensation
disclosure form that provides compensation information for the preceding calendar year. This bill
contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
SB 186 (Kehoe D) The Controller.
Current Text: Amended: 4/6/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/7/2011
Last Amend: 4/6/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/6/2011-S. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor I-Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead I 1st House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/11/2011 11 a.m. -John L. Burton Hearing Room (4203)
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS, KEHOE, Chair
Summary: Existing law authorizes the Controller to appoint a qualified accountant to make an
investigation and to obtain the information required for the annual report of financial transactions.
This bill would authorize the Controller to exercise discretionary authority to perform an audit or
investigation of any county, city, special district, joint powers authority, or redevelopment agency, if
the Controller has reason to believe, supported by documentation, that the local agency is not
complying with the financial requirements in state law, grant agreements, local charters, or local
ordinances. This bill would require the Controller to prepare a report of the results of the audit or
investigation and to file a copy with the local legislative body.
Position
SB 235 (Negrete McLeod D) Water conservation districts: reduction in number of directors.
Current Text: Amended: 3/14/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/9/2011
Last Amend: 3/14/2011
Is Fiscal: N
Location: 3/29/2011-A. DESK
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Summary: The Water Conservation District Law of 1931 generally governs the formation of water
conservation districts and specifies the powers and purposes of those districts. This bill would
authorize a water conservation district, except districts within the County of Ventura, whose board of
directors consists of 7 directors, to reduce the number of directors to 5, consistent with specified
requirements.
Position
SB 267 (Rubio D) Water supply planning: renewable energy plants.
Current Text: Amended: 3/17/2011 rdf html
Introduced: 2/14/2011
Last Amend: 3/17/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/24/2011-5. N.R. &W.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor FDesk FPolicyFFiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/12/2011 9:30 a.m. - Room 112 SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER, PAVLEY, Chair
Summary: Existing law requires a city or county that determines a project is subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act to identify any public water system that may supply water for the project
and to request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. If no
public water system is identified, the city or county is required to prepare the water supply
assessment. This bill would revise the definition of "project" to exclude a renewable energy plant that
would not demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required
by a 500 dwelling unit project. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
SB 449 (Pavlev D) Controller: local agency financial review.
Current Text: Amended: 3/30/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/16/2011
Last Amend: 3/30/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/7/2011-S. APPR.
2Year Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. [Enr�[v�� Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law requires certain local agencies to furnish reports to the Controller concerning
financial transactions of the local agency, subject to uniform accounting and reporting procedures
prescribed by the Controller. The Controller may provide for the investigation of certain local agency
finances if a report is not made in the time, form, and manner required or there is reason to believe
that a report is false, incomplete, or incorrect. This bill would additionally authorize the Controller to
conduct a preliminary review to determine the existence of a local agency financial problem, and
perform an audit upon completion of that review, subject to specified criteria. This bill contains other
related provisions.
Position
SB 482 (Kehoe D) Public beach contamination: standards: testing: closing.
Current Text: Amended: 3/30/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/17/2011
Last Amend: 3/30/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/6/2011-S. E.Q.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead 1st House 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Existing law requires local health officers to submit to the State Water Resources Control
Board prescribed information regarding beach postings and closures and requires the board to make
that information available to the public and to post the information on its Internet Web site. This bill
would, commencing January 1, 2012, give primary responsibility for administration of the provisions
relating to monitoring site locations, monitoring frequency, and public notification to the board and
would leave in place the regulations existing as of January 1, 2012, to be administered, enforced, and
amended as necessary by the board . The bill would delete related findings . This bill contains other
existing laws.
Position
Oppose
SB 771 (Kehoe D) Renewable energy resources.
Current Text: Amended: 3/22/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Last Amend: 3/22/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/22/2011-S. E. U., &C.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal Floor I Desk Policy Fiscal Floor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House I 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 4/28/2011 Upon adjournment of session - Room 3191 SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND
COMMUNICATIONS, PADILLA, Chair
Summary: Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over
public utilities, including electrical corporations, as defined. Existing law requires the PUC to require
the state's 3 largest electrical corporations, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and
Electric, and Southern California Edison, to identify a separate electrical rate component to fund
programs that enhance system reliability and provide in-state benefits. This rate component is a
nonbypassable element of local distribution and collected on the basis of usage. Existing PUC
resolutions refer to the nonbypassable rate component as a "public goods charge." The public goods
charge moneys are collected to support cost-effective energy efficiency and conservation activities,
public interest research and development not adequately provided by competitive and regulated
markets, and renewable energy resources. Existing law establishes the Renewable Resource Trust
Fund as a fund that is continuously appropriated, with certain exceptions for administrative expenses,
in the State Treasury, and requires that certain moneys collected to support renewable energy
resources through the public goods charge are deposited into the fund and authorizes the Energy
Commission to expend the moneys pursuant to the Renewable Energy Resources Program. Existing
law requires that 79% of the moneys collected pursuant to the renewable energy public goods charge
that are deposited into the fund be used for a multiyear, consumer-based program to foster the
development of emerging renewable technologies in distributed generation applications. These
moneys are deposited into the Emerging Renewable Resources Account within the Renewable
Resource Trust Fund. This bill would include as eligible electricity generating systems that may receive
incentives pursuant to the Emerging Renewable Resources Account, continuous clean renewable
energy resources, as defined, that utilize waste gases from landfills, digesters, or wastewater
treatment facilities to generate electricity. By expanding the uses to which moneys that are in a
continuously appropriated account may be used, the bill would make an appropriation. This bill
contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
Support
SB 833 (Vargas D) Solid waste: facilities permit.
Current Text: Introduced: 2/18/2011 odf html
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 3/10/2011-S. E.Q.
2Year Desk Polic Fiscal I Floor Desk Policy FFi7scall I Floor Conf. I Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House 2nd House Conc.
Calendar: 5/2/2011 1:30 p.m. - Room 112 SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, SIMITIAN, Chairman
Summary: The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 regulates the management of
solid waste. The act authorizes that the California Integrated Waste Management Board may
designate and certify a local enforcement agency within each county to carry out specified powers and
duties, and requires the board and certified local enforcement agencies to perform specified functions
with regard to the regulation of solid waste management, including the issuance of solid waste
facilities permits. This bill would additionally prohibit an enforcement agency from issuing a solid waste
facilities permit, on or after January 1, 2012, if that permit would allow the disposal of solid waste
within 500 feet of a river that supplies any aquifer that provides drinking water for more than 50,000
persons, or within 1,000 feet of a site considered to be sacred and of spiritual importance to a
federally recognized Indian tribe. This bill contains other existing laws.
Position
SB 900 (Steinberg D) California regional water quality control boards: members: proceedings.
Current Text: Amended: 4/6/2011 ndF hcmi
Introduced: 2/18/2011
Last Amend: 4/6/2011
Is Fiscal: Y
Location: 4/6/2011-S. RLS.
2Year Desk 11 Policy Fiscal Floor FDeskFPolicyFFiscalFloor Conf. Enrolled Vetoed Chaptered
Dead ist House 2nd House Conc.
Summary: Under existing law, the State Water Resources Control Board and the 9 California regional
water quality control boards prescribe waste discharge requirements in accordance with the federal
national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES) permit program established by the federal
Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (state act). This bill would delete
the provisions prohibiting a board member from participating in actions that involve the member or a
waste discharger with which the member is connected. The bill would specify that the limitation on a
board member's financial interest applies only to a disqualifying financial interest within the meaning
of the Political Reform Act of 1974. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
Position
Total Measures: 32
Total Tracking Forms: 32
JNZ1 SAN/T.4 ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
9 We protect public health and the environment by providing effective wastewater collection,treatment,and recycling.
c+
9 ~
or
F
N E
April 6, 2011
Members of the California Assembly and Senate
California State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814
Serving Re: Opposition to any property tax shifts from enterprise special districts
Anaheim
Brea Dear Members of the California Assembly and Senate:
Buena Park On behalf of the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), we understand that
Cypress California faces an unprecedented budget shortfall and our leaders are seeking
Fountain Valley
solutions to fill the gap. We know that times are tough; however, we respectfully
request that any budget solution not be borne on the back of local government.
Fullerton
Garden Grove Like Sacramento, my agency is suffering loss of revenues. Permit and collection
fees are down about$9 million this year and like other local government agencies,
Huntington Beach property taxes revenues are down too. In 2009, Sacramento borrowed property
Irvine taxes from local government and we continue to shift $7-8 million per year to the
La Habra State through ERAF.
La Palma Why property taxes are important to OCSD
Los Alamitos OCSD uses the property taxes we receive to fund our$1.9 billion capital
Newport Beach improvement program, including the maintenance of$6.2 billion in ageing
infrastructure. As a result of a federal consent decree, we are spending $500 million
Orange to upgrade our facilities and property taxes fund this program and create local jobs.
Placentia Any property taxes taken by Sacramento would hamper our capital improvement
Santa Ana program and impair our ability to meet the Federal mandate.
Seal Beach Can't you just raise rates?
Stanton In the past, the Legislative Analyst's Office has argued that special districts like
OCSD do not need property taxes because we can simply raise rates to cover
Tustin losses. While technically true, in this tough economy, the last things the tax payers
Villa Park of Orange County need is a Sacramento-imposed tax increase. Orange County is
Yorba Linda already a donor county and shifting property taxes would only make this situation
worse.
Costa Mesa
Sanitary District If OCSD lost our property taxes, it would mean a 30 percent rate increase to the tax
Midway City payer.
Sanitary District
Irvine Ranch
Water District
County of Orange
f10844 Ellis Avenue • Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 (7141 962-2411 • www.ocsd.com
recycled paper
4�JNSV S A N 1 Tq TOy
= A
e
c
o -
2
Members of the California Assembly and Senate
April 6, 2011
Page 2
We've done our part
In the past few years, the Board of Directors has worked hard to cut costs, create
more efficiency and make the most of every public dollar. Some of the things we've
done to trim costs include:
• Trimming the overall capital improvement program by $500 million;
• Implementing a two-tier pension system to lower long-term costs and
obligations;
• Imposing a hiring freeze;
• Cutting the number of departments in half and
• Reducing the number of Board committees by half;
• Holding the line on pay increases with some staff receiving no raises since
2008.
• Reducing 12 positions, including 4 management-level.
These cost cutting measures happened while we also raised rates to residents and
businesses in Orange County to meet increasing costs and demands.
In short, we have been fiscally responsible so why should we be punished for
Sacramento's inability to manage this problem effectively?
We appreciate your hard work to solve California's fiscal crisis and once
again urge that you do not shift local property taxes to solve Sacramento's
budget problem. We ask that you look for other alternatives rather than forcing
fiscally responsible agencies like ours to increase burdens on our ratepayers.
Regards,
4k-"�
Larry randall, Chairman
Board of Directors
LRC:MG:gg