The Santa Clarita City Council plans to hold hearings on electric vehicle charging stations and the Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018, an initiative that proposes to amend the state Constitution’s rules for how state and local governments can impose taxes, fees and other changes.
The initiative is still gathering signatures, but if it reaches the requirement it will be on the Nov. 6 general election ballot. City staff plan to provide the council information on the potential impacts of the initiative, should it be passed.
The biggest aspect of the initiative would affect Santa Clarita’s process for acquiring land, said Masis Hagobian, an administrative analyst with the city. “It would have pretty significant impacts on our process for annexations,” he said. A provision in the proposed measure would impact future annexations and require residents in such unincorporated areas to vote on new local taxes or fees, Hagobian said.
A two-thirds vote by residents would be required to extend a local tax to a new territory. This would require cities to receive two-thirds approval from affected residents prior to applying any existing local tax on any future annexed areas. If this measure were to pass, the city would be prohibited from applying these local fees and taxes on newly annexed territories in lieu of a two-thirds vote of support.
The city will also discuss electric vehicle charging stations and vote on whether staff should move forward with the proposed project.
“With the popularity of electric vehicles growing, the city conducted outreach and research to assess the community’s need for EV charging stations,” said spokeswoman Carrie Lujan. “A city-wide survey found that 90 percent of respondents supported the idea of installing more EV charging stations and 80 percent would consider driving an electric car if more stations were available.”
Also on the agenda’s consent calendar is approving the city’s formal positions on various state legislation and an agreement between the city and the Building Industry Association of Southern California.
If the council approves the calendar, it would formally oppose certain Senate bills and support certain Assembly bills.
S.B. 828 would require cities and counties to have an inventory of land that would accommodate 125 percent of a city’s or county’s share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment for each income level.
This bill would also require that 100 percent of the city’s or county’s share of the RHNA be made available for multifamily housing.
The city would also formally oppose Senate Bill 831, which would override their authority to determine land use for accessory dwelling units, a type of residential unit.
It would also formally oppose Senate Bill 946, which would require the city to adopt a sidewalk vending licensing program.
For Assembly bills, the city would support A.B. 2214, which establishes a voluntary certification program for drug and alcohol residential recovery facilities, and A.B. 2268, which revises the formula for allocating vehicle license fee adjustment amounts to restore revenues to cities that have annexed developed areas.
