COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

County Manager’s Office

DATE:

June 30, 2010

BOARD MEETING DATE:

August 10, 2010

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

None

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

David S. Boesch, County Manager

SUBJECT:

County Manager’s Report #9

A.

Assembly Bill 1373 (Lieu), Advertising: grant deed copy services

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution in support of Assembly Bill 1373 (Lieu), Advertising: grant deed copy services.

BACKGROUND:

Existing law provides that certain advertising-related practices are unlawful and makes a violation of those provisions a crime.

DISCUSSION:

Assembly Bill 155 (Lieu) would restrict the activities of grant deed copy services by prohibiting certain misleading representations and requiring specific disclosures. These include, the use of language warning homeowners that they need to purchase a copy of their grant deed or other record due to property foreclosures or loan modifications and/or that the offeror of the grant deed copy service is not affiliated with a governmental entity. The bill would require grant deed copy services to include the following disclosure in all of their solicitations: “This service to obtain a copy of your grant deed or other record of title is not associated with any governmental agency. You can obtain a copy of your grant deed or other record of title from the County Recorder in the County where your property is located for (amount of fee for the copy of a grant deed or other record of title in that County).”

Approval of this Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision of 2015 of a Collaborative Community by ensuring that County residents are fully informed that they may obtain copies of their grant deed or other record of title from the County Clerk Recorders office for a nominal fee. The Resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by County Counsel.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

B.

Senate Bill 1275 (Leno), Mortgages: foreclosures

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution in support of Senate Bill 1275 (Leno), Mortgages: foreclosures.

BACKGROUND:

Existing law regulates the nonjudicial foreclosure of properties. It requires a trustee, mortgagee, or beneficiary to record a Notice of Default (NOD) and allow three months to lapse before setting a date for sale of the property. It also requires a notice of nonjudicial foreclosure sale to be officially noticed in a newspaper of general circulation, posted on the property, and recorded at least 20 days before the sale date.

DISCUSSION:

Senate Bill 1275 (Leno) would extend the requirements of Senate Bill 1137 (Perata, Corbett, Machado), Chapter 69, Statutes of 2009 until January 2013. Senate Bill 1137 imposes a 30-day requirement before a mortgagee may file an NOD and requires that they contact the borrower, either in person or by telephone, to assess the borrower’s financial situation to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure. It also requires that the NOD include a declaration that the mortgagee has contacted the borrower and has tried with “due diligence” to contact them or that no contact was required because the borrower filed for bankruptcy, surrendered the property or contracted with an entity to extend the foreclosure process. “Due diligence” is defined as requiring the mortgagee to send a first-class letter to the borrower and then call them at least three times at different hours and on different days. If the borrower does not respond within two weeks, the mortgagee is required to send a certified letter, return receipt requested. These requirements only apply to loans originating between January 2003 and December 2007 for owner-occupied residential real property containing no more than four dwelling units and recorded prior to January 2009. Senate Bill 1275 also applies a different set of provisions to different types of mortgage loan servicers, including mortgage loan servicers who are required to review loans pursuant to HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) and those who are not.

Approval of this Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision of 2025 of a Livable Community by ensuring that County residents who are facing foreclosure are afforded more opportunities to work with their loan servicers before their home is sold in a foreclosure sale. The Resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by County Counsel.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

C.

Proposition 23, the California Jobs Initiative, and Implementation Efforts for Senate Bill 375

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution in opposition to Proposition 23, the California Jobs Initiative Bill, that will appear on the November 2, 2010 General Election ballot and encouraging the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to establish ambitious regional greenhouse gas reduction targets as envisioned by Senate Bill 375.

BACKGROUND:

Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006) seeks to reduce California’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions statewide to 1990 levels by 2020. Assembly Bill 32 requires the state ARB to adopt rules and regulations to achieve this reduction and directs the agency to take advantage of opportunities to improve air quality, thereby creating public health benefits from the state’s GHG emission reduction activities. The Governor has included $39 million in his proposed FY 2010-11 state budget for implementation of Assembly Bill 32.

Senate Bill 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) directs the ARB to set regional targets for reducing GHG targets for regions of the state and to work with the state’s 18 metropolitan organizations to align their transportation, housing, and regional land-use plans with greenhouse gas reductions in mind. Senate Bill 375 also provides incentives for creating attractive, walkable, and sustainable communities.

DISCUSSION:

The California Jobs Initiative would suspend the implementation of Assembly Bill 32 until the unemployment rate in California drops to 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters, or one full year. The state’s unemployment rate was 12.3 percent in June 2010.

A populous state with a large industrial economy, California is the second largest emitter of GHGs in the United States and one of the largest emitters of GHGs in the world. Thus, actions in California regarding carbon reductions have been advocated on the basis that they will contribute to a solution and may act as a catalyst to the undertaking of GHG mitigation policies elsewhere in our nation and other countries.

As the land-use legislation for Assembly Bill 32, full implementation of Senate Bill 375 is critically important. These actions on the part of the state and ARB include the establishment of aggressive regional GHG reduction targets, working closely with local governments to incentivize integrated land use and transportation planning that supports air quality and public health goals; and emphasizing reductions in vehicle miles traveled through alternatives to driving, such as walking, biking and mass transit options for local governments.

Approval of this Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision of 2025 of an Environmentally Conscious Community by ensuring that statewide efforts to reduce carbon emissions—critical to protecting the health of the state’s economy, environment and people—continue unabated. The Resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by County Counsel.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Unknown. According to the Legislative Analysts Office, suspension of Assembly Bill 32 could result in positive short term economic benefits to state and local governments in the form of lower energy costs. However, the long term impacts of Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375 on local governments are uncertain.

D.

Senate Bill 424 and House Resolution 1024, Uniting American Families Act of 2009

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution in support of Senate Bill 424 (Leahy) and House Resolution 1024 (Nadler), the Uniting American Families Act of 2009.

BACKGROUND:

Existing federal law does not currently recognize permanent, same-sex partners as family members for immigration purposes, including same-sex partners that are married or recognized as married in other states.

DISCUSSION:

Senate Bill 424, sponsored by Patrick Leahy (D. VT) and House Resolution 1024, sponsored by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), and together known as the “Uniting American Families Act,” (UAFA) would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to add same-sex “permanent partners” to the list of family members that a U.S. citizen or legal resident could sponsor for immigration. The UAFA defines “permanent partner” as an individual 18 years of age or older who: (a) is in a committed, intimate relationship with another individual 18 years of age or older in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment; (b) is financially interdependent with that other individual; (c) is not married to or in a permanent partnership with anyone other than that other individual; (d) is unable to contract with that other individual a marriage recognizable under the INA; and (e) is not a fist, second, or third degree blood relation of the other individual.

Approval of this Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision of 2025 of a Collaborative Community by ensuring that all residents of the County regardless of sexual orientation are afforded the same rights and responsibilities under immigration law. The Resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by County Counsel.

Performance Measure(s):

Measure

FY 2008-09
Actual

FY 2009-10
Projected

Federal/State Measures analyzed and acted on

25

35

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.