HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-15; City Council; 8582; Legislation Restricting Development Feesz
0
§
cc _.
cj
z ::,
0
(.)
er'" OF CARLSBAD -AGENr '' BILL
r. D ,1£ 11" &;" ,:::i IITL c._ •. ; ~urr CL,-, ~ ,
MTG. 4/15/86 PROPOSED LEG !SLAT ION RES TR I CT ING
DEPT. CA DEVELOPMENT FEES
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DEPT. HD.-
CITY ATTY V f:B
CITY MGR-~
That the City Council, by motion, oppose AB No.3479, AB No.3820,
AB No.4181, AB No.4335 and AB No.4277
ITEM EXPLANA Tl ON
The City Manager has asked our office to prepare this agenda bill
asking the City Council to go on record in opposition to the
following bills.
1. AB No.3479 (Harris) would shift the burden of proof in any
judicial action relating to a development fee to the City, who
would then have the burden of establishing that the fee does not
exceed the cost of the service for which it was imposed.
2. AB No.3820 (Costa) mandates that the City enter into
reimbursement agreements with developers for any portion of the
cost of a public facility which is not directly related to the
development itself.
3. AB No.4181 (Bader) provides that any development fee may not
exceed the need for facilities caused by that development alone.
Cumulative effect or general development impact fees would be
prohibited.
4. AB No.4335 (Leonard) is substantially identical to AB No.4181.
5. AB No.4277 (Ferguson) invalidates general impact fees which are
levied for the construction of infrastructure by requiring that
fees be used only for the specific facility or service for which
they are collected.
The adoption of these bills into law would seriously impact the
City's public facilities fee program. They would make it more
difficult to collect developer fees and would significantly
strengthen a developer's ability to bring legal challenges against
those fees. If the City Council concurs your action is to adopt the
above motion. The City Manager would then convey our opposition to
the League of California Cities and appropriate members of the
Legislature.