|
February 2003 The Statehouse California: Scramble to Save Coastal Commission. Gov. Gray Davis called the legislature into a second special session January 23 to deal with a December 30 ruling by the state's intermediate appellate court that effectively puts the California Coastal Commission out of business. The court ruled that the method of appointing the 12 commission members allows the legislature to dominate the commission, even though it is nominally an executive branch agency. That, the court said, violates the state constitution's separation of powers doctrine. The law establishing the coastal commission in 1976 gave the legislature's leaders authority to select eight of the commission's members. The other four are selected by the governor. All members serve "at the pleasure of the appointing authority." That provision, the court said, meant the legislature could indirectly influence two-thirds of the commissions membership, because it has the power to remove the members it appointed at any time, for any reason or no reason at all. Because the commission was constituted in violation of the state constitution, the court declared, it had no authority to issue cease-and-desist orders, or to grant coastal development permits. The special session is considering identical bills introduced in the assembly and the state senate to correct the constitutional deficiency the court identified. One bill has already passed the assembly, and the other is being reviewed by a senate committee. The bills would amend the Coastal Commission Act to provide that members appointed by the legislature serve for a fixed two-year term, and delete the provision that commission members appointed by the legislature served at the pleasure of the appointing authority. There is some question whether the legislative fix in fact responds to the court's criticism. The attorney for The Marine Forests Society, the nonprofit corporation that brought the lawsuit, contends the proposed fix does nothing to address the problem that two-thirds of the commission members are not answerable to the governor or anyone else in the executive branch. Ronald Zumbrun argues the governor should appoint all of the commissioners, subject to confirmation. That, he said, is the only way to get politics out of the commission's decision-making. Meanwhile, the state attorney general has requested the California Supreme Court to take up the case. APA's California chapter announced its 2003 legislative agenda at a January 31 news conference in Sacramento. While recognizing the gravity of the state's budget crisis, chapter leadership said the state's fiscal difficulties should not be an excuse to make the financial burdens on cities and counties worse. Chapter president Collette Morse, AICP, said the fiscal relationship between the state and local governments needs revision to give cities and counties a reliable source of revenue that does not fluctuate with the ups and downs of sales tax revenues. The chapter also supports bringing the vehicle license fee back to its original level, and amending Proposition 13 to direct a larger proportion of property taxes to local governments. "Cities and counties are chasing sales taxes that encourage sprawl and commercial or retail development over housing, and that has to change," Morse continued. Local governments need options to raise local revenue in order to support smart growth and encourage production of housing, she said. Other elements of the chapters legislative agenda include a call to streamline the review process for local plan's housing elements, to emphasize production of housing over production of paperwork, and changing the housing element review process to include incentives for producing housing as well as penalties for non-production. The agenda also calls for shifting planning for adequate water supplies from individual project approvals to the general plan. Water supply information should be based on the same timeline and use the same population and growth projections as the general plan. Other items on the chapter's wish list include support for legislation that encourages good planning and cleaning up legislation enacted last year, A.B. 1866, concerning density bonus incentives. The chapter says the law needs to be clarified to specify what local development standards would have to be waived if they affect density bonuses and to define what incentives would not have to be granted to a developer if they detrimentally impact the physical environment. Contact chapter executive director Sande George, 916-443-5301, sglobby@pacbell.net. Connecticut: Smart Growth. Several groups have been examining the potential for smart growth in Connecticut over the past year. The Blue Ribbon Commission on Property Tax Burdens and Smart Growth Incentives established by the legislature last year has held five meetings, commission member Christopher J. Smith reports. In October the commission heard from a representative of the Office of Legislative Research who reported on smart growth issues in Connecticut and the efforts of other states. William Ethier, executive vice president of the Homebuilders Association of Connecticut, presented that group's viewpoint, and First Selectperson Susan Merrow of East Haddam discussed the negative aspects of sprawl. The commission's November meeting focused on property tax burdens, urban decline and suburban sprawl from a regional perspective. In December, the commission discussed formulation of a "problem statement" that would serve as a basis for the commission's work this year pointing toward a final report to the legislature October 1. In addition to Smith, a member of the chapter executive committee, Christine Nelson, town planner for Old Saybrook, is a member of the 17-member commission. Other organizations actively studying smart growth issues include the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, the state's Transportation Strategy Board, the CenterEdge Coalition formed by the Hartford Catholic Archdiocese, the Connecticut Regional Institute for the 21st Century, and a group formed by the development community, Balanced Economic Strategies (BEST) for Connecticut. Former chapter legislative committee chair Jose Giner, AICP, is a member of the municipalities task force. Giner reports the task force has developed 10 "principles of smart growth" intended to foster coordinated local, regional and state planning. Giner notes that members of the municipalities conference are heavily represented on the blue ribbon commission, making it important that any smart growth efforts by the chapter be coordinated with the conference's efforts. The chapter has also taken formal positions on affordable housing legislation, impact fees and attempts by other professions to usurp planners' functions. On affordable housing, the chapter said it has reviewed a number of proposals related to affordable housing appeals, and concluded that no change in existing affordable housing law is warranted at this time. The existing legislation is working and does not need to be amended or repealed, the chapter's position paper states. On impact fees, the chapter position paper states such fees can be a useful tool in the context of a statewide smart growth program. They are not a substitute for adequate funding of general capital improvements, nor should they be used as a device to stop growth, the chapter says. Regional or state planning needs to be part of an impact fee program, and APA's standards for development of impact fees should be part of any legislation authorizing them. Finally, the chapter announced its opposition to a proposal to define the practice of engineering using phraseology that infringes on the skills and expertise of other professionals, including land use planners and zoning officials. As drafted, the chapter says, the bill might require such persons, who regularly review construction plans and plans for the use of land, to be licensed engineers. Contact chapter legislative committee chair Donald J. Poland, AICP, 860-623-6030,
ewplanning@yahoo.com. Examination of the bill also reveals its genealogy includes much that will be familiar to those who have studied Massachusetts's "anti-snob zoning " law. The bill provides for issuance of expedited comprehensive permits for affordable housing. Failure by the permitting authority to render a decision within 100 days of the application is deemed approval. A developer of affordable housing whose application is denied or burdened with conditions that the developer believes makes his project unfeasible may appeal to a housing appeals board to be established by the legislation. Massachusetts: Zoning Law Reform. The Zoning Reform Working Group has set up a website, www.masszoningreform.org. The Massachusetts chapter of APA is helping to support the site financially. The text of the draft Massachusetts Land Use Reform Act and a summary of its provisions can be found there. State Sen. Marc R. Pacheco has incorporated the draft language in his "Livable Communities" bill, S. 1250, introduced January 1.
|
| |
Printer-Friendly Format
