New State Policies and Trends

1. New State Policies and Trends September 7, 2005

2. Planning Context • California will continue to grow at what some would characterize as an alarming rate. • California does not have a plan for growth, nor a statement of policy about the State’s interests related to growth. • Local governments make most of the major decisions about growth. Such decisions are often made for reasons more to do with local finances than with the needs of the community. • Sprawling growth costs us all, including loss of agricultural and resource land, increased costs of services and pollution. • Rural sprawl has joined suburban sprawl as an urgent land use problem. • The legal process to restructure local government has not been comprehensively revisited since 1963.

3. Tipping Point for Action • Traffic, Traffic, Traffic • Housing Prices • Declining Air and Water Quality • Food Security in Jeopardy • Loss of the California Landscapes We Love • Loss of Quality of Life

4. Tipping Point for Action Congestion Pollution Sprawl Asthma Diabetes Obesity

5. State Anti-Dumb Growth Assessment • Identifies and acknowledges significant “smart growth” actions already taken. • Catalogues significant work efforts not yet implemented. • Identifies possible actions to advance the State’s interests in growing smarter. • Presents options for policy and process actions to accomplish key goals based on stakeholder interviews.

6. The Opportunity • Tremendous opportunity exists for a comprehensive and precedent setting growth strategy for California: • There is strong evidence of the Administration’s interest in “smart growth.” • A planning framework is in place. • The decade-long smart growth movement has established significant common ground among broad interest groups.

7. Clear Interest in Smart Growth • Blueprint for a Hydrogen Highway. • Formation of a Sierra Nevada Conservancy. • Green Building Initiative. • Green House Gas Emission Reduction Targets. • $5 Million in Blueprint Planning Grants. • California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley.

8. Strong Planning Framework • The Planning and Zoning law sets for an extensive structure for addressing regional planning, funding, growth, environmental quality and growth issues. • AB 857 (effective 1/1/03) amended the Planning and Zoning Law to establish three state planning priorities: • Promote Infill • Protect Environmental and Agricultural Resources • Encourage Efficient Development Patterns

9. Current Dialogues • The Governor’s Anti-Dumb Growth Work Group • BTH and HCD Led Housing Stakeholder Meetings • The CEQA Improvement Advisory Group • The League of Cities – Builder Housing/GP Task Force • The Perata Working Group • California Association of Counties Housing/Fiscal Working Group

10. State “Anti-Dumb Growth”Efforts • Formed Anti-Dumb Growth Cabinet Work Group • Focus: Housing, Housing, Housing • Actions Taken: Regional Blueprint Grants; Go California Transportation Bills; Global Warming and Green Building Initiatives; other. • Actions Postponed: Home California Proposal; CEQA “reform” legislation; other. • Formed CEQA Improvement Advisory Group. • Assessment of Other Opportunities Ongoing.

11. Intent of Perata Bills • Improve local and regional planning to provide greater certainty for construction of higher density housing, transit oriented development, urban infill and protection of resources, habitat, flood prone areas and agricultural lands. • Create new financial and regulatory incentives for housing construction and resource protection. • Provide funding for planning.

12. The Challenge • Complexity of the issues. • Legacy of prior efforts. • Participant fatigue. • Engaging the public. • Partisan politics.

13. Prior Efforts • Previous “smart growth” dialogues have reaped only partial reforms: • 1976: An Urban Strategy for California • 1980s: League of Cities: Action for the 90’s • 1991: Governor’s Interagency Council on Growth Management • 1997-99: Commission on Local Governance for the 21st • Century • 2000: Smart Growth Caucus • 2001: Housing and Land Use Working Group • 2002: ULI Smart Growth Initiative • 2003: Environmental Growth and Policy Report

14. Growing Consensus to: • Improve economic competitiveness and quality of life. • Remove barriers to infill. • Provide new and exciting housing and transportation choices. • Use land more efficiently. • Protect farmland and habitat. • Improve air quality and the environment.

15. Housing Choices in the Right Places

16. Recommendations • Fully implement AB 857 to redirect state functional plans and funding to planning priorities. • Establish a single-statewide, bi-partisan “task force” to develop specific legislative, budget and policy changes to achieve smarter growth patterns. (Evolution of the CIAG) • Support funding for planning at all levels, including regional “blueprint” or countywide plans for growth and conservation.

17. LAFCo’s Roles • Participate in the statewide dialogue. Complete the work begun by the Hertzberg Amendments. • Role in regional planning efforts/developing regional/countywide “smart” plans. • Potentially expanded role to oversee local government compliance with specific planning outcomes – infill, efficient use of land, protection of agricultural lands and the environment.

18. “The Administration will seek to reform onerous regulatory and planning laws to promote home building and accountability for housing production while requiring less paperwork between local governments and the State. Every local jurisdiction should plan for and be prepared to accommodate their own natural population increase and workforce, and to do so on the most efficient land use pattern possible, minimizing impacts on valuable habitat and productive farmland.”Governor’s Budget Message to the State Legislature