The Santa Clarita City Council will get a chance to weigh in on bills about licensing for alcohol and drug abuse treatment facilities and the state’s film and television tax credits at its next meeting.
Throughout the year, the council looks at state legislation and takes formal positions at its council, per the recommendation of its Legislative Committee.
Committee members Friday recommended the city support four state bills at its June 12 meeting.
The bills are:
- Assembly Bill 1734, which extends the California Film and Television Tax Credit Program for five additional fiscal years
- A.B. 1734’s counterpart Senate Bill 951
- A.B. 3162, which makes changes to the licensing process of alcoholism and drug abuse recovery and treatment
- Senate Bill 1317, which addresses guidelines on reporting unlicensed residential alcoholism or drug abuse treatment facilities to the State Legislature
Two bills were held in standing committee, and will not advance to full council at this time, said Mike Murphy, the city’s intergovernmental relations manager.
The committee did not advance Assembly Bill 3171, which appropriates $1.5 billion from the State General Fund to cities to support local homeless services, or Senate Bill 912, which appropriates $2 billion to cities to fund the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund to address homelessness.
The city’s legislative staff recommended the city adopt a “support” position to all proposed legislation except A.B. 3171 and S.B. 912, which concern homelessness and would possibly require further discussion by the City Council in open public session, according to city documents.
Legislation brought before the committee is based off the city’s annual legislative platform adopted every year, said Masis Hagobian, an administrative analyst with the city.
“The document is the legislative platform that identifies federal and state issues that the City Council essentially agrees are priority issues we want to focus on,” he said.
Those issues range from homelessness to public safety to land use. Legislation may also be brought to the committee’s attention if it concerns impacting local governance, Hagobian said.
The Legislative Committee does not meet regularly, Murphy said. The city may possibly have a couple more meetings before the end of the legislative session at the end of August, but it is uncertain at this time.
The committee’s last meeting on May 8 discussed positions on bills that the City Council formally took on when it passed its consent calendar on May 22.
It opposed S.B. 828, which 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 also formally opposed Senate Bill 831, which would override their authority to determine land use for accessory dwelling units, a type of residential unit and S.B. 946, which would require the city to adopt a sidewalk vending licensing program.
For Assembly bills, the city supported A.B. 2214, which would establish a voluntary certification program for drug and alcohol residential recovery facilities, and A.B. 2268, which would revise the formula for allocating vehicle license fee adjustment amounts to restore revenues to cities that have annexed developed areas.
