AB 2920 of 1982

Assembly Bill 2920 (Rogers-1982)
Chapter 1041, Statutes of 1982

In 1982, the 1967 and 1970 versions of certain Public Utilities Code sections were amended, repealed, and re-added following legislative passage of Assembly Bill 2920.  (See Exhibit #1h)  This was done by giving termination dates of January 1, 1989 to the older text of the sections with amendments to the language.  (Id.)  On January 1, 1989 the sections were to cease to be operative, and new sections, with similar, or substantially similar provisions were to become operative.  (Id.)  Assembly Bill 2920, introduced on March 2, 1982 by Assembly member Don Rogers of Bakersfield.  (See Exhibit #1a)  

Assembly Bill 2920 was heard in the Assembly Committee on Local Government and in the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means.  (See Exhibit #3 and #5)  In the Senate, Assembly Bill 2920 was heard by the Senate Committee on Local Government and the Senate Committee on Finance.  (See Exhibit #2 and #6)  Six amendments were made to Assembly Bill 2920.  (See Exhibit #1b through #1g and #2)  Subsequent to legislative approval, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., signed the bill on September 14th, and it was recorded by the Secretary of State on September 15th as Chapter 1041 of the Statutes of 1982.  (See Exhibits #1hand #2)

Commenting on the nature of the bill as last amended on August 16, 1982, the Concurrence in Senate Amendments analysis prepared by the Assembly Office of Research stated “. . .this bill altered the powers of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). . .”  (See Exhibit #11, page 1)

The analysis of the Assembly Committee on Local Government summarized the bill, stating it “makes various changes to the provisions of law governing planning for airports.”  (See Exhibit #3, page 1)  This analysis commented on the need for the bill, stating:

1. THE PURPOSE OF AB 2920 IS TO STRENGTHEN THE ROLE OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS IN PLANNING FOR THE ORDERLY GROWTH OF AIRPORTS AND SURROUNDING TERRITORY.  ACCORDING TO THE PROPONENTS OF THE BILL, ALUC’S HAVE NOT BEEN EFFECTIVE IN CARRYING OUT THEIR MANDATE TO ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PLANS WHICH WILL SAFEGUARD THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE INHABITANTS WITHIN THE VICINITY OF AIRPORTS AND THE PUBLIC IN GENERAL.  CURRENTLY, THE ALUC DOES NOT CLEARLY IDENTIFY PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH AIRPORTS AND DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDING AIRPORTS, NOR DOES THE LAW CLEARLY STATE THE PURPOSE AND POWERS OF AN ALUC.  IN ADDITION, IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE LAW DOES NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE METHOD FOR ACHIEVING CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ALUC PLANS AND LOCAL AGENCY’S GENERAL PLANS.

(See Exhibit #3, page 6)

The complete Legislative History Report and Analysis and documents with authenticating declaration expands upon the information above.  In addition to available legislative file materials from the Assembly and Senate Committees, the author and the Governor, our research typically includes review for competitor and predecessor bills, interim reports, hearings, studies and other relevant background documentation unique to this legislation.  To order a complete report, please contact us at Legislative Intent Service or by calling us toll free at 1-800-666-1917.

SB 1238 of 1983

Senate Bill 1238 (Watson-1983)
Chapter 1322, Statutes of 1983
                    

The Enrolled Bill Memorandum to the Governor from the Legislative Secretary contains the following digest of Senate Bill 1238:

This bill would authorize the Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD) to establish special benefit assessment districts to finance facilities of the “Metro Rail” project in Los Angeles.
(See Exhibit #17, document PE-2)

Background on Senate Bill 1238 is set forth in the analysis of the Senate Committee on Local Government, which was the first Committee to hear the bill.  (See Exhibit #3)  The analysis states:

The Southern California Rapid Transit District  (SCRTD) is building “Metro Rail,” a rapid transit line from Union Station in Los Angeles, through the Wilshire District and Hollywood, to North Hollywood.  SCRTD plans 16 stations along this route.  SCRTD wants to capture part of the increased property values that will occur around its Metro Rail stations to help pay for the project.
     (See Exhibit #3a, page 1)

The complete Legislative History Report and Analysis and documents with authenticating declaration expands upon the information above.  In addition to available legislative file materials from the Assembly and Senate Committees, the author and the Governor, our research typically includes review for competitor and predecessor bills, interim reports, hearings, studies and other relevant background documentation unique to this legislation.  To order a complete report, please contact us at Legislative Intent Service or by calling us toll free at 1-800-666-1917.

SB 1159 of 1983

Senate Bill 1159 (Torres-1983)
Chapter 497, Statutes of 1983

                    
The Enrolled Bill Report of the Department of Transportation summarizes Senate Bill 1159 stating that it “broadens SCRTD’s authority to fund transit operations and construction of transit related facilities.”  (See Exhibit #13, document PE-5)

The Senate Transportation Committee analysis of Senate Bill 1159 as it was amended on April 6, 1983 discusses the need for the bill, stating:

The Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD) is currently planning the construction of a major rapid transit line in Los Angeles County referred to as the Metro Rail Project or Wilshire Corridor.  The project is estimated to cost over $3 billion and the district is anticipating 75% federal funding for the project.  

     This bill would provided the district with more flexibility in the planning and construction of the system. . . .

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL:  The Metro Rail is a major public investment which requires careful planning for the project and the adjacent properties.  The bill would provide the district with needed authority to interact with other entities, including the private sector, to maximize its potential.
     (See Exhibit #3, pages 1 and 2)

In a floor statement on Senate Bill 1159, Senator Torres explains the purpose of the bill as follows:

This measure is designed to allow the Southern California Rapid Transit District to participate in land use decisions which will protect existing neighborhoods, attract new private investment in stations, and preserve options for expansion of the initial stations and support facilities.
(See Exhibit #12, document A-3)

The complete Legislative History Report and Analysis and documents with authenticating declaration expands upon the information above.  In addition to available legislative file materials from the Assembly and Senate Committees, the author and the Governor, our research typically includes review for competitor and predecessor bills, interim reports, hearings, studies and other relevant background documentation unique to this legislation.  To order a complete report, please contact us at Legislative Intent Service or by calling us toll free at 1-800-666-1917.

SB 220 of 1971

Senate Bill 220 (Cologne-1971)
Chapter 633, Statutes of 1971
                    

Senator Gordon Cologne, the author of Senate Bill 220, described the bill in his letter to Governor Ronald Reagan as follows:

This bill prohibits incompatible employment for compensation by officers and employees of local agencies identical to that which the law now prescribes for state employees.  The bill sets up the mechanics for determining whether or not outside employment by these people is or is not incompatible, inconsistent, in conflict with or inimical to his duties as an employee of such local agency.  The language has been carefully worked out with private businesses who depend on off-duty local employees and the League of California Cities and other representatives of local agencies who are interested in what type of work these employees are doing.  

At the present time, I know of no opposition and see the bill as a means of eliminating some conflicts of interest which have arisen.
(See Exhibit #5, document PE-5)

The Senate Local Government Committee analysis of the April 26, 1971 version of Senate Bill 220 states that the bill “is roughly similar to Gov. Code Section 19251 dealing with state employees.”  (See Exhibit #3, page 2)  This analysis further explains the background of the bill as follows:

In general, the California Constitution provides the basic authority for cities and counties to establish qualifications for their respective employees.  (For the most part, special district basic enabling acts grant them authority to employ necessary means to accomplish their purposes.)

Various statutory provisions (and the Civil Service Act) governs what constitutes conflict of interest with regard to state and local agency officers and employees -- including political activities thereby.

One section in particular (Gov. Code § 19251) expressly prohibits state employees from engaging in activities determined to be “clearly inconsistent, incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to” their duties as state employees.  The various appointing powers, with the approval of the State Personnel Board, are responsible for determining which activities incompatible.
(See Exhibit #3, page 1)

The complete Legislative History Report and Analysis and documents with authenticating declaration expands upon the information above.  In addition to available legislative file materials from the Assembly and Senate Committees, the author and the Governor, our research typically includes review for competitor and predecessor bills, interim reports, hearings, studies and other relevant background documentation unique to this legislation.  To order a complete report, please contact us at Legislative Intent Service or by calling us toll free at 1-800-666-1917.

SB 643 of 1963

Senate Bill 643 (O’Sullivan-1963)
Chapter 2038, Statutes of 1963
                    

The Legislative Analyst prepared an analysis of Senate Bill 643 as amended on June 6, 1963 which provides this brief summary of the measure:

This bill is a comprehensive attempt to reduce fire hazards in those areas of the State for which fire protection is the responsibility of the Division of Forestry.  The bill stems from the recommendations of the Senate Fact Finding Committee on Natural Resources.
(See Exhibit #4b, page 1)

Summarizing the provisions of Senate Bill 643, the Bill Memorandum to the Governor dated July 19, 1963 states:

Declares that burning of vegetation is for a public purpose if the State Forester determines that such burning is necessary to prevent or suppress forest fires.  Authorizes cities, counties, and districts to adopt more restrictive fire prevention regulations if necessary to meet local fire hazards.  Regulates rubbish dumps outside of cities.  Authorizes the State Forester and State Board of Forestry to establish hazardous fire areas and to prescribe regulations, conditions and penalties with respect to the use of property in such areas.  Establishes Advisory Committee on the Treatment of Rights of Way.  Provides additional regulations concerning throwing litter or burning substances from vehicles.
(See Exhibit #5, document PE-3)

A letter from the Director of Conservation of the Department of Conservation to Governor Brown described Senate Bill 643 as “. . . the first major attempt in over twenty years to provide the fire agencies with up-to-date statutes to cope with the prevention of fires.  It should give the fire agencies statutes designed to reduce the losses of lives and property and damage to our natural resources.”  (See Exhibit #5, document PE-5)  This letter also indicated that the Senate Bill 643 was the result of an interim study conducted by the Senate Fact Finding Committee on Natural Resources.  (See Exhibit #5, document PE-4)  

The complete Legislative History Report and Analysis and documents with authenticating declaration expands upon the information above.  In addition to available legislative file materials from the Assembly and Senate Committees, the author and the Governor, our research typically includes review for competitor and predecessor bills, interim reports, hearings, studies and other relevant background documentation unique to this legislation.  To order a complete report, please contact us at Legislative Intent Service or by calling us toll free at 1-800-666-1917.