HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/21/2007, CLR #1 - SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SLOCOG) AND SAN LUIS OBISPO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORI MEETIN33---- AGENDA.
DATE g[WV/67-ITEM # (.R.
anIIIIIIIII�ill�lli
lwson Report
city of san Luis oslspo
August 9, 2007
To: Council Colleagues
From: Dave Romero, MayorC-j/
Subject: San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and
San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Authority (SLORTA)
Meeting of August 8,2007
Items of special interest to San Luis Obispo:
SLOCOG
The Executive Director reported that the Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers have been
received from HCD and will be discussed by the SLOCOG Board in September or October. The
good news is that rather than the 18,000+housing units that were required to be accommodated
by the previous update, the new figures are less than 5000 units, which should make it easier for
local jurisdictions to accommodate within their planning programs.
The director reported that under the proposed state budget, $1 '/a billion is proposed to be
diverted from the Public Transportation Account to the General Fund to be utilized towards
payment of bond debt service, regional center transportation, home-to-school transportation, and
Prop 42 loan payments. This is at the expense of local agencies which anticipated these funds.
The COG is joining the League of California Cities and county organizations to protest these
actions.
Proposition 1B funds proposed to be apportioned for cities has also been reduced due to budget
considerations, with the current version of the state budget allowing somewhere between $600
and $900 million for cities and counties rather than the $1 billion anticipated.
The Transportation Improvement Program administered by CalTrans proposes to install a new
traffic signal on Grand Avenue at U.S. 101 to relieve northbound off ramp congestion. This will
be done at state expense. The Safe Route to School program is also appropriating funds to
construct a pathway bridge across Prefumo Creek connecting Oceanaire Drive and Vista del
Lago.
The SLOCOG Board approved a series of new programs to encourage improved transportation
systems performance. Among these programs is an increase in park and ride spaces and an
expansion to the Safe Route to School program.
GACouncil Support&Corresp\City Council Correspondence\Romero\Liaison Reports\Liasion Report SLOCOG-SLORTA.doc
4!�Zx/-/
Major capital funding allocations are still in the pipeline for a number of interchange projects,
including major modifications to Los Osos Valley Road at U.S. 101, the City's Railroad
Pedestrian Safety Trail and the Bob Jones Bike Trail.
A new phone number is being proposed for adoption in the coastal section of California to match
its usage throughout most of the U.S. This will be 511, which will give travelers information on
all forms of transportation. This has been a successful program throughout the U.S. for almost
ten years, but has been slow to come to California, and in particular, to the Central Coast. This
will provide a single source for information on dial-a-ride, transit services, rideshare, bicycle and
road conditions, and all other travel services.
Staff reported on the CalTrans SHOPP Program (which includes improvements and major
maintenance work conducted by CalTrans) including a rehab of US 101, north of San Luis
Obispo, the rehab of Hwy 227 in San Luis Obispo, and a rehab of Hwy 1 in San Luis Obispo.
All programs are to be conducted during the next couple of years.
SLORTA
The Regional Transportation staff has been in the process of obtaining constructions bids for a
transit maintenance facility to be located off Tank Farm Road in San Luis Obispo. After
completed construction plans were available, the latest estimate for modifications to a building
on the site is well over$5 million, approximately twice the earlier estimate, bringing into
question whether there will be sufficient savings in maintenance costs with the development of
this facility to warrant moving ahead. There was also a question regarding how to fund this
facility without reducing funds available to the local transit agency. The SLORTA Board finally
asked staff for more detailed information regarding the availability of long-term funding and an
analysis of costs associated with this project. This will be considered at the September meeting.
San Luis Obispo
Property.Owners Associa('� Sslallor) C (t.
P.O.Box 12924
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
San Luis Obispo Property Owners' Association's Comments on the Response to the
June 19, 2007 Request for Information Regarding Secondary Dwelling Units — 8-21-07
I. In the past 7 years, 23 of the 710 total residential permits issued in San Luis Obispo were issued for
Secondary Dwelling Units (SDUs) of which approximately±20 of those were located within the Duval
Ranch Developments) thus resulting in only three (3) other permits for SDUs within the City of San Luis
Obispo within the last 7 years.
2. In the Building Division's records from 2000-2007,the relative, permit related costs for SDUs were
compared with other residential permit costs as shown below:
• Up to a 450 S.F. SDU costs, on average, $21,200 in fees (or about$50-$60/S.F. for a typical 375'to 400
S.F. SDU), 85%of which are impact fees for water, sewer, or transportation related City fees, (or about
$18, 200 in impact fees.)
• A 1500 S.F. multiple family residence costs, on average $23,200 in fees (or about+$15/S.F.), 77% of
which are impact fees (or about $17,864 in impact fees.)
• A 3000 S.F. single family residence costs, on average, $33,700 in fees (or about+$11/S.F.), 66%of
which are.impact fees (or about $19,800 in impact fees.)
It is apparent from the August 14, 2007 City Memo that only a mere 3 SDUs have been permitted each year for
the last seven years (in spite of the state mandate to allow SDUs to be built within all California cities) and,
since the SDU ordinance was approved in July of 1999.
It is also apparent that the per square foot costs (the unit costs)to obtain a City of SLO building permit are
inordinately high for SDUs compared with other, more conventional housing types and, most importantly, there
appears to be a significant disincentive to create smaller, more-affordable housing units based on the present
City of San Luis Obispo's residential building permit fees.
The potential impact of the current fee structure will undoubtedly have a significant impact on in-fill residential
development including complying with the City's recently adopted Housing Element which emphasized "Smart
Growth Principles" and the desire to create greater amounts of low to moderate income housing as well as the
future size of market-rate houstrig and the future height of residential and"Mixed-Use"developments which
contain any meaningful housing components.
An important question that must now be asked is "What is the incentive to build smaller residential units
in denser residential developments which use a given property more efficiently when there is an existing
disincentive to do so from a permitting cost perspective?"—Think about it!
San Luis Obispo _
Property Owners Association L f
P.O.Box 12924
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
August 21, 2008
Honorable Dave Romero
Members of the City Council
I want to thank city council and staff for the information on granny units. It is very helpful..Because
building has slowed down, 1 believe its a good time to review existing policies to see how well they
are working toward stated goals and objectives, and revise them,if necessary,to reflect the -
ongoing commitment to these goals.
I have observed first hand that if fees are perceived as too high, people will simply convert their
property illegally. There are lots of such illegal conversions and additions. They just bootleg a
kitchen in later. It creates construction problems and also breeds disrespect for the law.
High permit costs contribute to less affordable housing which reinforces an elitist perception about
our community.
High permit costs on small units negate many of the goals of the Housing Element which include
Green Building Principles, more low to moderate income housing, and a desire for smaller market
rate homes and mixed use housing projects.
At this time the San Luis Obispo Property Owners Association and 1 would like to propose some
specific recommendations:
1) Re-evaluate the present fee structure based on square footage to make fees relative to size.
The city should encourage the creation of smaller units; if people wanted a bigger home they
could always add on later.
2) Look at the averages of costs on a per square foot basis and numbers of units built in hast
seven years,then rationalize the building permit charges based on a dwelling unit's size, type
and relative density. These per square foot fees(unit costs)could be adjusted for inflation
and revised every few years.
3) Streamline the planning review and permit process for housing that meets the goals of the
Housing Element
4) Speed up approval for green building,especially that which meets the goals of the Housing
Element
SLOPOA and I appreciate the Council's support and hope that in this slow building period,we can
work together to accommodate the needs of our citizens and the financial interests of the city. As
the executive director of the San Luis Obispo County Builders Exchange, I see first hand,every
day in the plan room, how the current-construction slowdown is forcing our members to search
long and hard for work. That is the impact of reduced local building activity and reduced building
permits.
Very truly yours,
LESLIE HALLS
President
San Luis Obispo Property Owners Association
Page 1 of I
Irv, as ID? «-P
Tom Swem
From: Phil Gray[pgray@midstate-cal.com]
v )
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 12:25 PM
To: Tom Swem
Cc: Linda Garvey; Lisa Blasquez; David Gray; Jim Smith
Subject: Cancellation of 2436 Broad St, SLO
Dear Tom,
It is with great regret that I forward the attached cancellation. In spite of your best efforts, and discussions with city
staff and council members, the risk of street closure as shown on the city's proposed.plan, was unacceptably high.
I want to thank you for your patience, and for all your help in researching this issue.
Phil Gray
Mid-State Properties,LLC
Gray Properties
1320 Archer St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 543-1500 Fax: 543-1590
p,ray.u-.midstate-cal.com
7/16/2007
Thomas C. Swem,GRI,CCIM
Commercial-Investment Real Estate
REAL PROPERTY INVESTMENTS 570 Marsh Street,San Lois Obispo,CA 93401 805544.4422 E-mail:tcs(u)swem.com
IF F &:(5)l� Property Summary
High Visibility Property
• Three Bldgs totaling approx
10,800sgft
5 legal lots totaling approx
Showroom plus offices
m 7 double(14) service bays
Uses include Auto sales and
service as well as many other
yo AP
commercial & office uses
sC ' � e
:� '�• `" : a • Close to Downtown SLO
�o
City of SLO Broad Street
traffic count of over 30,000
trips/day
2436 Broad Street Financial Review
San Luis Obispo, CA • Priced at$2,875,000
• $2761sgft for improvements
Located at the comer of Broad and Caudill • Cap Rate= 5.19%(based on
Streets in the Broad Street Corridor of San proforma)backup package available
Luis Obispo. This property has been the
home of VALLEY MAZDA for 20+years. It is KIVERA� Qx a CoQ
currently comprised of a Showroom of ns r, e
approx. 3,200sgft plus two Service and =kSi r a a w
Parts Dept buildings totaling approx. Wbsi
7,640sgft All this on 5 legal lots totaling w m E 'ems
approx. 34,400sgft. The Broad Street <20
Corridor is currently under City consideration
for up-zoning from Commercial Service(CS) Ab or = o �, "6
to Neighborhood Commercial(CN). Wwdbridpe s1
1J11CW1 or " �xb6
The City of San Luis Obispo is a destination Lwmme Dr s
area right at the intersection of Highways s
101 and 1, has a nighttime population of etr� r�°'` �. E
over 48,000 and an average daytime
population of over 100,000. It is the county IXO m
seat and hosts all City, County, State and T-3- '
Federal offices servicing the County
including the California Men's Colony prison, Call for an appointment to
Cal Poly University and Cuesta College. Cal pp
Poly University Campus is to the north of the see this outstanding very
Downtown and has an approximate
enrollment of 16,000 students and over well located property.
2,500 employees. 005.544.4422
1 0
Experts in Commercial Investment Real Estate
yp�_CR6l'�R�F.
�~ = City of Grover Beach
TO: MAYORS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
tenah`D FROM: STEPHEN C.LIEBERMAN,MAYOR
AGENDA
SLO COUNTY MAYORS MEETING
Friday, August 3, 2007 at 12 Noon
Grover Heights Park, Large Group Barbecue Area
(North 10'" Street & Atlantic City Avenue)
Grover Beach, California
Other Agencies: City of Arroyo Grande City of Paso Robles
City of Atascadero City of Pismo Beach
City of Morro Bay City of San Luis Obispo
Representative- League of California Cities, Channel Counties
Representative- Assembly Member Sam Blakeslee's Office
Representative- Senator Dianne Feinstein's Office
The following items are scheduled for discussion:
1. Welcome - Stephen C. Lieberman, Mayor of Grover Beach.
Lunch selection will be a Santa Maria-style barbecue (tri-tip and chicken)prepared
especially by "The City of Grover Beach Barbecue Team".
2. Gang Activity in San Luis Obispo County and Proposed State Legislation - Sarah Moffett
from Senator Feinstein's Office.
3. Legislative Update - Field Representative Debbie Arnold, Assembly Member Blakeslee's
Office.
4. League of California Cities Report- Regional Representative Dave Mullinax, League of
California Cities.
5. Regional Housing Allocation Issue - Mayor Tony Ferrara, Mayor of Arroyo Grande.
6. Roundtable Discussion.
The new meeting of the San Luis Obispo County Mayors will be in Morro Bay.
Please RSVP by Wednesday.August 1 by calling Grover Beach City Hall at
(805) 473-4567 or send an e-mail to gbadmin(aWover.ore
Directions to Meeting Location for August Mayors Luncheon:
Heading South towards Grover Beach:
Take Highway 101 South;
Take the Five Cities Drive Exit be ore the 4' Street Exit);
Turn left at t-intersection (in front of factory outlets at traffic signal);
Turn right onto 4'Street(traffic signal at Five Cities Drive&4`h Street);
Tum left onto Atlantic City Avenue
Park is on the left-hand side.
Parkins:
Off-street parking available at the end of the park(near 10`x' Street) or anywhere along the street.
fjpQl&dme0vrkm Ij 101 `'.,'... `'�`` —;p+ =5+•^�:�tir, �,Q
-......__ rA,Smo&eOdl bra `eye• ' r �h
CCer fhly r j ✓,C,
Cat j, '�.>O, a?e"�.•: / .
AT
�iq l 1
v ��ita nlrenco, L_
r r .� i�8gtin�J/f f Lto fE i^j IIi -.,,•\ '�SL�r_, --`."^-,
( � Chas' 4 1( I'' q v�� vFJ� mo
��'L I a, %e�\R I_ tin /� (i==
�t man j j'VievrAver trh .kd� rI'llJJp/ ,�J.!' < ��
Parkv'iewAve `--jF'lf
➢oik
(agatyNve-. m
I_�2 �,v. ll �S
ILjLyr � Saratoga�Ave.=._ �.r!�._I���__,��---- �� tiJ4-
�` -i(-��2�
JI rI d IIf )'�1 PzNlevfporrAV �L-
.11 I—Ji I r n n ry m n �� ._s0" �Aewpo
—'• �h
;BcightatnAve�^�.„�-�-_-^
0,2007YaFroo!Inc. ;��I 1 y,'^ I� li �,� Ij ? "-"z'=6a0°•2007=Nav�q:,Te1 Atlas.
S.456
Gang Abatement and Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)
Bill Summary
• Makes illegal participation in a criminal street gang a new federal
crime. A "criminal street gang" is defined to mean a formal or informal
group, club, organization or association of five or more persons who have
committed three or more separate felony crimes — including at least one
serious violent felony — within the past five years. This legislation makes
it a federal crime for a member of a criminal street gang to commit,
conspire or attempt a predicate gang crime, or to recruit minors or others
into one of these gangs with an intent that they will commit a gang
crime.
o The term "gang crime" is defined to include violent and other
serious state and federal felony crimes such as: Murder,
Manslaughter, Maiming, Assault with a dangerous weapon,
Kidnapping, Robbery, Extortion, Arson, Obstruction of justice,
Tampering with witnesses or victims, Carjacking, Trafficking in
controlled substances, Firearm offenses,and Money Laundering
• Criminalizes violent crimes in furtherance or in aid of criminal street
gangs. Racketeering (RICO) laws were designed to prosecute organized
crime, with Mafia-style organizations in mind. One such law prosecuted
violent crimes committed in furtherance of the racketeering enterprise.
o This legislation would create a similar structure of crimes and
penalties for violent street gangs, so that gang members who
commit violent crimes such as murder, kidnapping, sexual assault,
maiming, assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in
serious bodily injury, which are committed in furtherance or in aid
of a criminal street gang, would be punished under federal law.
Federal law provides more restricted and stringent bail conditions,
can move cases to trial more quickly, and leads to prison sentences
that are not subject to parole.
• Creates a new criminal offense for murder and other violent crimes
committed in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Drug crimes
are also often intimately intertwined with criminal street gangs. This
provision creates a new criminal offense for violent crimes that are
committed during and in relation to drug trafficking crimes, and requires
that any sentence imposed for this crime run consecutive (one sentence
must follow another) to any sentence on an underlying drug offense.
Prosecuting Gang Members
• Establishes new penalties for gang-related crimes. Under current law,
a felon's criminal street gang involvement can be treated at most as a
sentencing enhancement, adding no more than 10 years to a sentence..
This bill establishes far higher penalties for violent gang crimes,
including the possibility of life imprisonment without parole for murder,
kidnapping, aggravated sexual abuse, or maiming. If the gang crime is a
serious violent felony, the criminal can receive up to 30 years in prison.
And for other violent gang crimes, the maximum penalty is 20 years in
prison.
• Increases the maximum penalties for violence committed in
furtherance of racketeering, so that the laws complement one another,
and provide punishment appropriate to the more serious, and more
dangerous, organized nature of these offenses.
. .... .............. ...... .. ..
. ................................ .. . . ........................................
. ._..
• Creates tougher laws for certain federal crimes like carjacking,
conspiracy, and other existing offenses in which gang members may
be involved.
.......... ......
o Eliminates barriers that limit the abilities of prosecutors to
charge individuals who commit serious crimes like carjacking;
o Increases the penalties for violent felons who possess firearms;
and
O Allows an offense committed in Indian country to serve as a
predicate crime for a racketeering crime.
• Clarifies that impersonating a police officer is a form of extortion
that can be prosecuted under the federal Hobbs Act.
Extends the time within which a violent crime case, or a terrorism
crime can be charged and tried. For violent crime, the time is
extended from 5 years to 10 years after the offense occurred or the
continuing offense was completed. For terrorism cases, the time is
extended from 8 to 10 years.
• Allows for detention of persons charged with possession of
firearms who have been previously convicted of prior crimes of
violence or serious drug offenses. Current law does not allow a
prosecutor to ask that a person be held without bail based on the
person being convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
This bill would allow prosecutors to make that request of a judge but
would also allow a criminal defendant the right to argue why he or she
should not be held.
_
..... __..._ .. .. .
• Permits wiretaps to be used for the investigation of gang crimes.
The use of wiretaps —which must be approved and monitored by
judges—has proven widely successful in racketeering (RICO) and
narcotics cases. This bill would extend this accepted wiretap process
to the gang crimes created by this bill.
• Increases penalties for illegal aliens committing violent crimes. If
an illegal alien commits a felony crime of violence, he would be
subject to a maximum penalty of 20 years. If he commits a felony
crime of violence after being ordered deported, he would face a
maximum penalty of 30 years.
......_.............. ............_........_................................................................. ................. ........_... ........_ .. ........ ....
Increases penalties for criminal transfer of firearms for use in
crimes of violence and drug trafficking. This section increases the
maximum penalty from 10 to 20 years if the seller knows that a gun
he transfers will be used in a crime of violence or a drug trafficking
crime.
Prevention and Intervention
• Creates and provides assistance for "High Intensity" Interstate Gang
Activity Areas (HHGAA). This legislation requires the Attorney
General to designate certain locations as high intensity interstate gang
activity areas, and provides assistance in the form of criminal street gang
enforcement teams made up of local, state and federal law enforcement
authorities to investigate and prosecute criminal street gangs in each high
intensity interstate gang activity area.
• Authorizes funding of$500 million over five years to support
HIIGAA activities, half of which would be used to promote
prevention efforts.
o Local Schools, service providers and community and faith leaders
with demonstrated success in fighting gangs, would be empowered
to work collaboratively with law enforcement in a coordinated
approach to fighting gangs, following the successful "Operation
Ceasefire" model.
o A national Research, Evaluation and Policy Institute would also be
established to collect, analyze and teach "best practices" for
fighting gang violence.
o One-half of these dollars — $250 million —will go to prevention
and intervention programs. This includes after-school programs
and job-training directed toward gang prevention.
• Authorizes $100 million over five years to expand the Justice
Department's Project Safe Neighborhood program, with an expansion
of prosecutors and law enforcement agents focused on reducing violence
and gun crimes by gang members.
• Authorizes $50 million over five years for expansion of the FBI's
Safe Streets Program, to investigate and prosecute violent street gangs
and criminals;
• Authorizes $100 million over five years to expand crime control
grants to state and local governments, so they can hire additional
prosecutors, staff and improve technology as needed to bring more cases
against gangs and violent criminals.
• Authorizes an additional $270 million over three years for witness
protection needs, including those of state and local prosecutors.
4 AGENDA ITEM IS
SB 375: Climate Change, Transportation Planning and Land Use
Ex"utive Summary: SB 375 (Steinberg) focuses on reducing greenhouse gas {GHG) emissions by
controlling growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). It requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPOs) to include preferred growth scenarios (PGS) in their next Regional Transportation Plan and to
allocate transportation funds in accordance with the new plan as a means of achieving GHG emission
targets set by the California Air Resources Board. This bill is designed to help advance compliance with
2006 AB 32 (Nunez), which requires California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. It
also contains CEQA reforms for projects in cities and counties that amend their general plans to conform to
the PGS. SB 375 appears to be a well-meaning effort to reduce GI4G emissions by changing transportation
spending priorities. SB 375 explicitly states a PGS shall not be interpreted as superseding or interfering
with the exercise of land use authority of cities and counties,but irmay have just that indirect effect.It will
clearly influence_how and where cities grow and the underlying land use decisions about that growth. As
such,it deserves much more discussion and consideration than it has received to date.Staff will update the
board on recent discussions with the author and sponsor about these concerns. A proposed alternative is at
the end of the report.
Current League Position:OPPOSE UNLESS:AMENDED OR MADE A TWO-YEAR BILL.
Background
The issue of climate change has reached a tipping point in the public's consciousness and
in the state capitol, with some state officials vying to be seen as the leader in this area
and trying to outdo each other in advancing this agenda. With the passage last year of AB
32 (Nunez the California Global Warming Solutions Act, the issuance of a subsequent
Governor's Executive Order requiring low carbon fuel (LCFS)l and legislation two years
earlier requiring improved vehicle emission technologies in. California2, California is
leading the nation on global warming. In reality, that was the easy part The real work
now begins, as the recent flap over the leadership of the California Air Resources Board
{CARB)demonstrates.
Vehicles alone account for as much as 40 percent of all greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions
statewide. Thus, if we are to address climate change as a state, addressing vehicle
emissions in California is an absolute must. The most effective ways to address tailpipe
emissions are to increase fuel efficiency, use more low carbon fuels, or reduce total
vehicle miles traveled(VMT). Because vehicle fuel efficiency is also a federal issue(i.e.,
implementation of.the AB 1493' standards requires an EPA waiver that has not been
given) and the low carbon fuel standard is already being addressed by the State Air
Resources Board,the focus of the Legislature has shifted to reducing VMT.
SB 375 (Steinberg) does just that, requiring regional transportation planning agencies.
(MVOs) to incorporate into future regional transportation plans measures that will help
reduce future VMTs and the resulting GHG emissions, one part of the contribution of the
transportation sector to global warming emissions in California. Cities and counties that
amend their general plans to conform to the new plan, would be eligible for
The LCFS will.require fuel providers(defined as refiners,importers,and blenders of passenger vehicle
fuels)to ensure that the mix of fuel they sell into the California market meets,on average,a declining
standard for GHG emissions measured in CO2-equivalent gram per British Thermal Unit(BTU).
Z Under AB 1493(the"Pavley bile'),automakers will have until the 2009 model year to produce a new
California breed of cars and trucks that will collectively emit 22 percent fewer.greenhouse gases by 2012
and 30 percent fewer by 2016. Seven Northeastern states, including New York,have pledged to adopt the
California standards.
-63-
{ I
transportation funding and CEQA relief Those that elect not to conform, would not . .
receive these _benefits. The bill represents a significant effort to respond to global
warming,but it also raises serious policy questions that deserve careful consideration.
SB 375 is sponsored by the California League of Conservation Voters (CLCV), local
government's principle partner in the fight to defeat Prop. 90, and is supported by many
environmental groups and SCAG (which subsequently changed to a "No Position"). As
of the writing of this report, we understand it was also supported in concept by some
MPOs (SACOG, MTC). In the bill's final policy committee hearing in-the Assembly,the
League communicated it was ,ORnosed Unless Amended 3, based on a decision of the
League Executive Committee on July 9. We expect CSAC to join us in that position
shortly. The bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations Committee where it is
expected to be acted upon in late August.
What Does AB 32 Require?
The best place to start is with an overview of the major sources of greenhouse gas
emissions. This inventory is from the Governor's Office, and it is broken down by sector.
Figure 3—Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory-2405
others
8.3% 1
Transportation
Electric Power—ci,
60. i
22.2%
k�dustnat�
20.5%
All&Forestry
AB 32 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regulations and
market mechanisms that will ultimately reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions by
25 percent by 2020--or to the 1990 level! Mandatory caps will begin in 2012 for
significant sources and ratchet down to meet the 2020 goals. In the interim, CARB will
begin to measure the greenhouse gas emission of the industries it determines as
significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions.. The bill also provides the Governor the
authority to invoke a safety valve and suspend "emissions caps for tip to one year in the
case of an emergency or significant economic harm.
3 The League has had extensive conversations with the sponsor and has proposed detailed amendments to
SB 375 that we believe would address most city concerns.No response had been received by July 9,so the
Oppose Unless Amended position was announced.Discussions continue with the author and sponsor and
the board will be updated at the July meeting.
-64-
AB 32 and the Transportation Sector
AB 32 refers to "greenhouse gas emission sources." The CARB is authorized to decide
that the emissions from a particular "source" are at level that is significant enough to
require its participation in an emission reductions program.. While many have assumed
that the "sources" will be electricity generation and petroleum refining, the definition of
"source" is broad enough to include the "transportation sector." SB 375 requires the
CARB to set emission reduction targets for each region. AB 32 did not foresee this
regulatory authority,but the enforcement provisions of AB 32 are broad enough to allow
the CARB to enforce its emission reduction targets against regions that don't.perfonn°.
In 1990 there were 110 million metric tons (MMT)of greenhouse gas emissions from the
transportation sector. According to the Natural Resources flefense Council (NRDC), the
breakdown of the major contributors by sector is as follows:
GHG Reduction Strategies
Vehicle. Sector
Grwnhouse Gas Emissions
from Light Vehicles
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 . 2040 2060 -
Baseline in MMT 110 122 149 165 191 214 238
Reduction in gasoline vehicle
emissions -34 -58 -86 -119
Reduction in carbon intensity
of tuel -12 -37
Reduction in VMT -9 -15
Toad ln.MMT 110 61 60 24
With no change in policies (i.e., business-as usual) the transportation sector is projected
to grow to 165 million metric tons by 2020—a 55 metric ton increase—the amount AB
32 requires to be reduced by 2020 from a combination of three sources—(1)reductions in
gasoline vehicle emissions, Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS),and reductions in vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) through increased transit use and improved jobs-housing balance
through land use changes.
According to a recent draft staff report by the California Energy Commission, entitled
"The Role of Land Use in Meeting California's Energy and Climate Change Goals," "the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) estimates that VMT will continue to
increase at nearly 3 percent per year for the foreseeable future. Even with significant
penetration of ARB's greenhouse gas regulations and implementation of the LCFS, the
increase in GHG emissions from the increased travel will outweigh the policies combined
benefits."
The Act provides CARB with civil,criminal and injunctive powers to enforce the emissionregulations it.
mandates.
-65-
General Discussion
SB 375 and similar legislation present the board and membership with some very clear
choices. For years we have faced continued efforts by for-profit and nonprofit
homebuilders and others to micromanage the approval of housing at the city level. We
have won many of those fights and lost others. Our victories have often been due to our
partnership with environmental groups that have historically opposed more growth.
In recent years the League has adopted a smart growth policy which suggests a strong
commitment by city leaders to more compact urban development patterns that.use land
more efficiently,reduce energy consumption, and, not incidentally, help reduce vehicular
travel/emissions—all within a framework of local land use control.
With public support for addressing climate change at all-time highs, many city officials
support AB 32 and believe the League and cities should be and are leading in developing
policies and programs to reduce carbon emissions. From the discussions of the League's
Climate Change Working Group it is clear that some are even ready to support legislation
affecting cities, including and incentives and mandates for more compact urban
development in the future. Others are clearly not there yet.
The League strongly supports efforts to increase the supply of land for housing to meet
the affordable housing needs in our state that is experiencing an increase a 2 % annual
increase in population while we vehicle miles traveled are increasing 3% a year. Where
future housing is constructed, its proximity to job centers and the densities at.which it is
built will have a profound effect on future greenhouse gas emissions. Some homebuilders
are increasing their focus on the infill market niche as housing preferences begin to shift,
but there remains strong demand for traditional single-family housing choices—
especially among young families of Latino and other ethnic backgrounds.
Finally, as the climate change debate advances environmental groups that once opposed
any changes in.CEQA are beginning to understand the historic criticisms of builders and
local leaders about how CEQA has been used to block smart growth: They are giving
signals of a willingness to support reform to CEQA within a context that reduces pressure
to develop on the fringe of cities and removes barriers for infill development.
In other words, we may be approaching a historic time when the interests of the three
major interest groups in the debate over state land use, environmental and housing policy
are converging. It also could be a time of continued conflict and a lack of progress if the
major interest groups are not willing to change and negotiate a new paradigm for
planning future urban development.
The League itself is facing some choices. For years we have made alliances with builder f
and environmental groups, depending on the issue of the moment. In recent years we
have invested considerable energy in what are strong partnership, not merely alliances,
with counties, special districts and, most recently, environmental groups. We would not
have defeated Prop. 90 without these partnerships, and we would not be where we are in
our efforts to secure eminent domain reform without our partnership with the
-66-
environmental groups, particularly one with the California League of Conservation
Voters,the sponsor of SB 375.
Bill Summary
Key Premise of SB 375. Need to Reduce VMT. The environmental organizations
sponsoring this legislation (led by the California League of Conservation Voters, a key
ally of ours in defeating Pro. 90) maintain that changes in land use and transportation
policy must be made to achieve the goals of AB 32. Although greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions can be reduced by producing more fuel efficient cars and implementation of
the low carbon fuel standard (LCI=S), it will not be enough. Reductions in vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) will also be necessary. Thus, the travel demand models used by
metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to develop regional transportation plans
(RTPs) must assess the effects of land use decisions, transit service, and economic
incentives. SB 375 raises numerous policy issues concerning transportation planning, the
allocation of transportation dollars, potential effects on local land use authority, and
proposed changes to CEQA.
SB 375 Proposes the Following:
1) New Guidelines for Travel Demand Models.-Requires the California Transportation
Commission, in consultation with California Air Resources Board (CARB), to
prepare guidelines, by April 1, 2008, for "travel demand models used in regional
transportation plans" after consulting with stakeholders and holding two hearings.
The "guidelines" shall apply to all federally, designated metropolitan planning
organizations, county transportation agencies in non-attainment areas, and the
Southern California Association of Governments. All other transportation planning
agencies are `encouraged' to use the guidelines.
2) Connection Between Models and Corridor Planning. Requires all federally
designated metropolitan planning organizations, county transportation agencies in
non-attainment areas, and the Southern California Association of Governments to
report to the California Transportation Commission at the time of submission of the
regional transportation plan is submitted to the Commission and CalTRANS how the
regional travel demand model supports "corridor planning" and "small area
planning."(These teras are undefined).
3) CARB To Set GHG Emission Targets. Requires the CARB (by an unspecified date)
to set GHG emission targets for each region to be achieved by 2,020 and 2035 through
changes in regional land use and transportation policy.
4) Preferred Growth Scenarios (PGS) Required To Meet Target. Requires
metropolitan planning organizations — after receiving their emissions target from
CARB —to develop an RTP that includes a "referred growth scenario (PGS). " The
"preferred growth scenario" is required to identify areas within the region that are
"sufficient to house all the population of the region for all income categories. The
siting of the housing must use models that calculate vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The preferred growth scenario must also inventory
the region's emission of greenhouse gases and include measures to reduce greenhouse
-67-
gas emissions that are consistent with the targets developed by CARB for 2020 and
2050.
5) PGS to Exclude "Significant Resource Lands" From Development. Requires the
"preferred growth scenario" to also identify the following "significant resource
lands" and "significant farmland" which shall. be excluded from development to
include (A) all publicly owned parks and open space, (B) open space or habitat areas
protected by a habitat conservation plan, natural community's conservation plan, (C)
Lands subject to conservation or agricultural easements and lands under Williamson
Act contracts, or (4) other adopted natural resource protection plans. "Significant
farmland" is defined as farmland classified as prime or unique farmland, OR
farmland of statewide importance and is located outside all existing spheres of
influence, as of January 1, 2007. (This language needs to be clarified to make it clear
that it only involves land outside of spheres.)
6) Findings Necessary to Include Resource Lands in PGS. Require the transportation
planning agency, to only include in the "preferred growth scenario" agricultural
resource areas including areas zoned for open space, sensitive habitat for threatened
or endangered species, and habitat and linkage corridors for key species, and
floodplain after making findings that these lands can only be developed if they are
(1) adjacent to urbanized areas or located on infill sites; (2) served by necessary
utilities; (3) there is no feasible alternative; (4) the loss of resource area is fully
mitigated;and (5)the land is efficiently used (minimum of 10 units per acre).
7) Requires All Transportation Projects to Conform to PGS. Requires all proposed
projects to be"consistent with the preferred growth scenario." Defines the tern
"consistent with the preferred growth scenario" and" consistent with regional
transportation plans "to mean that the capacity of transportation projects and
improvements does not exceed that which is necessary to provided reasonable service
levels to the preferred growth scenario.
8) Transportation Funding Allocated Consistent With PGS. Restricts the allocation of
transportation fiznding to projects which are consistent with the PGS. (Prop 1B Bond
Moneys,and projects contained in the 2006 or 2008 Federal Transportation Improvement
Program are exempted,but some vagueness in the language remains.).
9) Affected Funding by PGS. Requires the following projects to be consistent with the
PGS. for the region:
• Projects to implement the RTP
• Corridors of statewide or regional priority
• Projects and improvements funded in the 5-year STP (beginning 01/09)
Congestion Management Plans
10)Protection for Local Land Use Authority. States that the preferred growth scenario
does not regulate the use of land, nor shall it be subject to any state review or approval.
States that nothing in a preferred growth scenario shall be interpreted as superseding or
interfering with the exercise of land use authority of cities and counties in the region.
-68-
(While helpful, this language is of small comfort, because the bill specifically excludes
transportation funding for projects on land by category in the bill, or only accessed after
specific - findings are made (infill . site, 10 units per acre, etc.).
11)CEQA Reform for Infdl Development. Contains the following three proposals related
to CEQA:
• Part One. If EIR has been certified on the preferred growth scenario and a local
government amends its general plan to conform to PGS, then only project specific
impacts must be studied of a residential or mixed use project(no more than 25%total
floor area in retail) located.on an infill site in an urbanized area. Land use and
housing elements must designate land at density and intensity sufficient to
accomplish goals of PGS.
• Part Two. No additional CEQA for "sustainable communities" projects. These
projects must meet several conditions, including: not larger than 8 acres, not more
than 200 units, consistent with "Mullin densities," no loss of affordable housing,
maximum of 75,000 square feet of retail; within '/.mile of transit; provide more than
5 acres of open space for each 1,000 new residents; and conform to the general plan.
Moreover, exception to additional CEQA review does not,apply if the development
has one of the following characteristics: presence of wetlands or riparian area,
hazardous substances, historic structures, fire hazards, seismic hazards, or includes
the development of publicly accessed park or open space.
• Part Three. No additional traffic mitigation would be necessary beyond what is
called for in the RTP in urbanized areas for projects that are consistent with the RTP.
If project complies with policies,then traffic impacts of project need not be studied in
an EIR on Negative Declaration. Local agency would have to review and update
mitigation measure every 5 years.
Specific Policy Questions Raised by SB 375:
• How should the League approach the issue ofclimate change in the context of land
use and transportation planning? -
• Which parts of this bill are necessary to implement AB 32 at this time? Which parts
go beyond that?
• To what extent does this bill alter and affect the local understanding of the role of
voluntary regional blueprints?
• What is a "preferred growth scenario"required by the bill? -How will it be
developed? What are its short and long term implications on local land use authority?
• What are the full implications of the bill's "categorical"exclusion denying
transportation funds to projects(for right-of-way acquisition,road expansions, etc.)
on any. (A)publicly owned parks and open space, (B)open space or habitat areas
protected by a habitat conservation plan, natural community's conservation plan, (C)
lands subject to conservation.or agricultural easements and lands under Williamson
Act contracts,or(4)other adopted natural resource protection plans?
• What are the full implications of denying transportation funds to transportation
projects located on agricultural resource areas including areas zoned for open space,
sensitive habitat for4hreatened or endangered species, and habitat and linkage
corridors for key species, and floodplains afterthe transportation agency makes a
-finding when adopting the regional transportation plan that these lands can only be
-69-
developed if they-are(1) adjacent to urbanized areas or located on infill sites; (2)
served by necessary utilities; (3)there is no feasible alternative; (4) the loss of
resource area is fully mitigated; and (5)the land is efficiently used(minimum of 10
units per acre).
• Is it appropriate for transportation agencies to be making the above finding? Will the
"no feasible alternative" language and other provisions invite environmental
challenges that will hold up the distribution of transportation funds?
0 How meaningful are the CEQA relief provisions? How important is thisissue to
local governments compared to potential limits on transportation funding and land
use?
With all these forces in mind, cities and the League face critical choices with regard to
climate change and SB 375. These include:
■ Local Government's Planning Authority. Climate change is a global issue. What.
are the roles and responsibilities of local government?
■ Information to Make Decisions. Climate change data is new and untested. While
the majority of scientists acknowledge the problem, relatively little is known about
specific impacts. For example,changes in weather patterns will impact flooding
models.But to what extent?And,how will local governments get the data they need
to make good decisions? For that matter,what constitutes"good data?"
• Statewide Standards To what extent will local governments accept state standards
and targets in order to get certainty in the process? Or, should a more "bottoms—up"
approach be taken?
a Local Government Role in Finding a Solution. Many legislative decisions could
intrude into local land use authority. What role will local governments play in these
discussions? Will they be seen as part of the solution? How do we strike the right
balance between global need and home rule?
Policy Committee Review
During the late June policy committee meetings, three committees discussed SB 375. A
summary of those discussions follows:
HCED Policy Committee. The HCED committee held a comprehensive discussion of
the bill, which included background on the climate change issue, the requirements of last
year's AB 32 (Nunez), and its greenhouse gas reduction emissions reduction goals and
timelines for implementation. Both League Executive Director Chris McKenzie and
League First Vice President Jim Madaffer participated in the discussion as well. A one-
page "SB 375 alternative" document was also distributed to committee members for
discussion.purposes (attached). While the committee discussion concluded without the
committee taking formal action on the bill, there was clear consensus that –while many
concepts in the measure had merit – that the scope of the measure required a more
lengthy discussion that required the bill to be slowed down and made a two-year bill..
The Committee also felt that it was important for the League to take a leadership role on
this matter.
-70-
Revenue and Taxation Committee Recommendation. SB 375 was added as an item
for the committee discussion due to the interest of the committee' chair and membership
in hearing more about the bill. While the committee did not take a formal position, they
asked to convey their concerns to the HCED committee, which was scheduled to meet the
following day. There were a variety of opinions in Rev & Tax on SB 375. Most
committee members agreed that this bill would reduce local governments' authority over
land use planning and that it is a one-size-fits-all prescription. Some felt that more
emphasis should be placed on what cities are already doing - and make sure that the
public is aware. Others supported the intent of the legislation but felt that it was overly.
burdensome. The committee did not have access to the materials shared with both the
HCED and TCPS committees the next day, including the proposed alternative(attached}.
TCPW Committee Recommendation. Similar to the discussion that occurred in the
other two_policy committees. There was support for the concepts of improved regional
transportation planning to address climate change concerns and a generally positive
reaction to the proposed alternative. Due to time-constraints, however, there was not the
in-depth of discussion that occurred in HCED. No formal position was taken.
RECOMMENDATION:Staff will update the board on discussions with the author and
sponsor to address League concerns._Staff recommends the board ratify the Executive
Committee's position to OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED to reflect League's concerns .
and authorize staff to propose the Potential Alternative to SB 375 (attached) and
negotiate suitable amendments with the author and sponsor, in consultation with the
Executive Committee. If amendments are rejected or the author is not amendable to a
two-year process with-the bill,staff recommends OPPOSE position.
-71-
Potential Alternative to SB 375
1) Ensure CARB Sets Reasonable Emissions Targets: CA Air Resources Board
(CARB) adopts regional emission targets following a collaborative process, involving
local governments and other stakeholders. The goal of this process is to ensure that the
initial targets set by CARB are technologically feasible given local conditions, resources
available, and realities of the private market. Emission targets are adopted after
consideration of emission reductions anticipated from non-transportation sector,
implementation of Low Carbon Fuel Standards.
2) Develop Bottom's Up Regional Strategy: Require each regional transportation
agency to develop,adopt,and include in its regional transportation plan, a regional
emission reduction strategy. The strategy will be a bottoms-up process developed by the
agency in consultation with a working group ofelected-officialsfrom cities and counties
in the region. The strategy includes a variety of programs and policies to achieve the
emission reduction goals established for the region by the CARB; and accommodates
locations for housing the regional need for all income levels.
3) Eliminate Conflicts with Housing RHNA: Amend housing element law to provide
that (1)RHNA allocation be consistent with locations identified in regional emission.
reduction strategy; and that (2)to acknowledge that to achieve emission reductions it may
not be possible for a local jurisdiction to accommodate its entire RHNA even if minimum
densities and other requirements are met.
4) Expedite.CEQA for Consistent Projects: Require RTPA to study the impact of the
strategy on climate change in the EIR prepared for the regional transportation plan. If a
local jurisdiction approves a project that is in an area identified by the strategy for
residential development,allow local jurisdiction to tier off EIR for climate change
analysis. Allow "grace period" for amendments to general plan wherein lawsuits,seeking
to require a climate change analysis in each project specific EIR could not be brought.
5) Establish Priority For Transportation Funds,Not Absolutes: Give funding
priority to transportation projects and improvements that further the.regional emission
reduction strategy.
6) Analyze Results: Require the agency to analyze the effects of using transportation
funds as an incentive to encourage land use policies which reduce regional emissions.
7) Improve Planning Data on Regional Environmental Issues: Allocate $20 million
state planning funds(Prop 84)to support studies and collaborative strategies with local
governments, LAFCO's and other stakeholders to develop regional strategies to identify
and preserve the most critical and sensitive habitat,natural resource, farmland and open
space in the region. Identify incentives for landowners and local governments to preserve
those lands. Allocate $30 million (or amount necessary) for improved regional
vegetation and habitat mapping.
-73-
� ,
ss
r;.
0-1:1• :11Niel 621.01
2007 LEGISLATIVE SUMMA
DISTRICT BILLS minimum,that school districts screen volu teers against the Megan's
AS 18:Warren Mattingly Signature Stamp Act Law database.All school sites can quickly access the website at no cost,
AS 18 allows a person who is unable to write as a result of a disability to creating little-to-no delays for prospective volunteers.
use a signature stamp.Current law requires consumers who are unable
to sign their to mark an'x'in the presence of a witness.AS 18 would allow AS 1594:Unprofessional behavior and volunteer screening
individuals living with disabilities to create and use a unique signature, This bill strengthens a school district's ability to dismiss an employee for
removing the unnecessary intrusions into voting and private legal transactions. unprofessional conduct,if that employee has written a sexually suggestive
or romantic communication to a pupil.Additionally,this bill prioritizes the
AS 87:Paso Robles Wines-Unified Labeling Strategy hearing of appeals for disciplinary actions taken involving a potential threat
AB 87 will distinguish Paso Robles wines as they compete in an to a student's safety.
increasingly crowded international market. By creating a regional identity ER EDUCATION
ON
through labeling practices,area wineries will benefit from being associated HIGHER
National Guard ONAPLProgram
with the highly regarded"Paso Robles"brand. AB 87 would make Paso AS 111 is urgency legislation to save a program designed to help
Robles the second appellation in the United States to have a unified California's National Guardsmen and women.This bill renews the
labeling strategy. Currently, the more than 200 appellations nationwide, Assumption Program of Loans for Education(APLE),which is set to
Napa is the only region to have established labeling protections in law. expire just prior to it being funded.for the first time since the program
AB 358:Santa Maria DMV Relocation was established,the 2006 Budget provides funding for 100 warrants for
AS 358 would allow for an innovative partnership between the City of the eligible personnel. However,funding cannot be distributed because
Santa Maria and the Department of Motor Vehicles to relocate the city's the Student Aid Commission is still drafting regulations for eligibility.
DMV office which is undersized and difficult to access.The current DMV Meanwhile,the program is set to expire on July 1,2007.
facility was built in 1969 for a population of about 32,000.Since that AS 153:Energy Bioscience Institute,UC Berkeley
time,the population has nearly tripled.Despite the surge in growth in the AB 153 seeks to revolutionize research at the University of California in the
community,their have been no major renovations or expansions to the exciting area of biofuels,securing California's role as a leader in renewable
facility since construction. AB 358 empowers the parties to negotiate a energy. The Energy Biosciences Institute(EBI)is a dedicated biosciences
fair market exchange or long-term lease agreement—and,if a suitable energy research laboratory that is proposed to be attached to UC Berkeley,
agreement cannot be reached,no party is adversely affected. and will be funded by a$500 million grant from British Petroleum over 10
AB 417:Santa Barbara County/San Luis Obispo County Regional years.This significant grant will fund long-term research and development
of clean energy alternatives to oil and gas.AB 153 secures the
Health Authority
This bill clarifies in law that the Santa Barbara Regional Health Authority commitment of the Legislature to provide the necessary support to secure
this unique partnership.
can expand to form a two county organized health system with the county
of San Luis Obispo.The bill would permit the health authority to provide CONSERVATION
health care to Medi-Cal recipients in both San Luis Obispo and Santa AS 838: State Parks Conservation Easements
Barbara Counties.The Regional Health Authority operates as a primary This bill allows the Department of Parks and Recreation to use
care network which emphasizes case management as a means of conservation easements to promote land stewardship among private
encouraging physician participation,improved access to care,high quality landowners,while strengthening and fulfilling the mission of the state parks
medicine,and efficient treatment patterns system. Parks would be authorized to fund easements on real property if it
is determined to protect a part of the state park or to preserve and enhance
PUBLIC SAFETY the natural resource,cultural,or historical value of the park.Conservation
AS 292:Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Funding,SLO County easements can be a much more cost effective tool for protecting existing
AS 292 is a bill to protect funding for local government costs associated state parks from encroachment then fee title purchase of an adjacent
with emergency planning and response for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power property. Such easements have the added benefit of avoiding higher
Plant. Existing federal and state law requires local governments around future ongoing operation and maintenance costs and keep local property
operating nuclear power plants to develop and maintain emergency on the tax rolls while protecting the core mission of the park from potential
response plans.Associated costs are reimbursed by the utility operating incompatible use.
the facility. However,the reimbursement provision is set to expire in 2009.
AS 292 would extend the life of the program and ensure that the County AB 1180:California Farmland Conservancy
of San Luis Obispo has the resources they need to discharge the serious This legislation provides the Department of Conservation with greater
responsibility of emergency preparedness,planning and response in the flexibility in its efforts to protect non-farmed parts of agricultural lands
event of radiological incident. that offer other important resource values and that are compatible with
agriculture. Such values as flood protection,wildlife habitat,open space
AS 1593:School Safety and recreational uses,could be maintained while keeping the land in the
This bill would help protect school children from known predators. production of agriculture. Approval of this bill will allow the Department
Blakeslee introduced AS 1593 after learning about a registered sex to maximize agricultural land conservation opportunities by permitting the
offender who was caught volunteering in a local preschool.The offender CFCP to draw from more diverse funding sources,such as Proposition 84
was only discovered after a vigilant parent recognized him on the Megan's and Proposition 1 E bond funds that recognize the importance of multiple
Law website and notified authorities.AB 1593 would establish,at a resource protection.
AS 1246:State Agency Mitigation Partnerships AS 578:Energy Transmission Planning
AS 1246 clarifies that a local or state public agency,in the development This bill would seek to elucidate interconnection issues surrounding
of its own project that requires mitigation,may allow nonprofit distributed generation(DG)by studying the impacts of distributed energy
organizations to accept and hold real property interests.Land trusts generation on the state's distribution and transmission grid. California is
are well suited in purpose and experience to accept and steward these transitioning from traditional large-scale powerplant operations,toward
lands/easements for many years to come,and their local presence a more widespread network of DG. Solar panels are appearing on
allows ready and cost-effective stewardship for the property. single-family residences across the state. Utilities are installing fuel
cells in high demand areas to relieve pressure on their transmission
AS 350:Vegetative Mapping and distribution system.The purpose of this bill is to provide a better
This bill builds upon existing statewide vegetation and habitat mapping understanding of the pressures and effects that increased utilization of
data collection activities. Specifically,the bill would develop a statewide DG will have on the distribution and transmission grid.
vegetation layer component,which is currently missing from the
mapping process.The development of a fine-scale multiple-attribute AS 809:Renewable Energy: Hydro Efficiencies
statewide vegetation layer map would provide invaluable data for the This bill would encourage power plants to invest in efficiency upgrades
purposes of habitat and wildland corridor identification. The addition at hydroelectric facilities in order to achieve incremental increases in
of this data would greatly enhance a variety of analyses,including the amount of renewable electricity generated.AB 809 would allow the
regional conservation planning,identifying endangered species habitats, efficiency gains to qualify as electricity that is an eligible renewable
identifying wildlife corridors,and monitoring impacts of global warming energy resource.The bill encourages efficiency improvements at
and climate change. hydroelectric facilities without detracting from the development and
investment in other renewable resources.
TRANSPORTATION
AS 1055:CalTrans Mitigation AS 1613:Energy Efficiency:Combined Heat and Power
AD 1r1cG cnnbc fn rr_nt -n fhc, 'rtn_.. . -_,,,,i.{n n.;ti,..,q,,,, A❑ 4r1 o n _,-ip IHn;AL._,,. Yh.,
W liil B COf4N,ei,efislvc o�lu%uOrudia:eU ilieuiUG ivai eVul Sucaulliric WlhCrl Sccn9 a 016t;IOUlcU 50(0110(1 illrougni a cugcrleraliOli OWLei.tib
efficiencies,expedite mitigation requirements,conserve financial 1613 promotes energy efficiency through highly-efficient combined heat
resources,and result in improved,regional mitigation.AB 1055 proposes and power(CHP)technologies,reduces greenhouse gas emissions,
that the mitigation requirements be viewed comprehensively,directing increases grid reliability,and cuts mobile-source emissions.AB 1613
smaller mitigation proposals towards larger,resource intensive areas would encourage the development of small CHP technologies suitable
that will serve mitigation needs today and tomorrow as they unfold. for residential and small business use,and reward homeowners who
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION also use this technology to generate electricity to power hybrid cars.
AS 539:Immigration Screening AS 846:Clean Marine Fuels Incentive
AS 539 would fund a new position within the Department of Mental This bill will promote the use of cleaner-buming,low sulfur fuel in
Health,who would be trained to federal standards to conduct the vessels along our coasts and in our ports.This proposal would
handful of daily screenings to assess the immigration status of patients encourage cleaner fuel use sooner than would otherwise be required
transferring from CDCR facilities to DMH. In addition,AB 539 would by international,federal and state regulations,improve public health
require DMH to communicate and prepare documents related to throughout the state and in concentrated areas around our ports, and
the status of identified undocumented patients. Over the course of bolster California's maritime fuel sale economy. AS 846 would provide
treatment,in the event that all legal remedies for further commitment incentives for the purchase of Low-Sulfur Diesel(.05%and lower)
are exhausted,those individuals who have been designated as cleaner fuels for use in auxiliary engines while these vessels are in
undocumented nationals would then be transferred to federal custody for Cal'Ifomia waters(at berth,anchorage and transiting to and from our
processing and deportation. Ports in our rivers,bays and harbors).
ACR 24:SCAAP Resolution HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT
ACR 24 asks that the Governor and the California State Attorney AS 1019:Annexation
General to demand the federal government provide reimbursement This bill seeks to correct a problem in current law relating to
for the cost of incarcerating criminal aliens. Federal law,through annexations. Under current law,when a city and county annex land
the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program(SCRAP),requires the County is still the responsible party to provide the Regional Housing
that states and local governments be reimbursed for the costs Needs Assessment Housing numbers even though in some instances
associated with incarcerating inmates in prisons and jails who are they no longer have that land available to them. This bill would require
undocumented foreign nationals. However,the federal government that the city and county negotiate for the housing numbers as part of
has consistently failed to provide full reimbursement funding.The the discussion of the annexation,if they reach an impasse the Council
federal government's failure to compensate our state for these costs of Governments would step in to ensure that an agreement is reached
has severely exacerbated problems in our prisons related to funding by both parties and this agreement is binding.The bill simply seeks to
and overcrowding. provide equity in the law for cities and counties when an annexation
ENERGY/ENVIRONMENT takes place to ensure the process is handled in a fair and balanced way.
AS 114:CO2 Scrubber Technology PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
This bill would require the California Energy Commission(CEC)to AB 1702:CalTrans Hiring Practices
develop a program to facilitate and encourage the development of cost AB 1702 grants the Department of Transportation authority to make
effective containment, scrubbing,and capture technologies to decrease permanent the highly successful hiring and selection process of the
industrial process carbon dioxide emissions.Carbon management is Managerial Selection Demonstration Project.
understood to be one of the most complex and pressing environmental
issues facing the industrial world,today. Numerous strategies for ELECTIONS
dealing with carbon have been proposed,including: reduced carbon AB 773:Absentee Ballot Returns
intensity;caps;trading;and,international protocols for reaching global This bill would permit voters to return an absentee ballot to any polling
targets,among others. Critical to the success of any of these strategies place in the state,and if the ballot is submitted to a county where the
is viable technology for containment,scrubbing,and capture to prevent voter is not registered,would require the county official to deliver the
its introduction into the atmosphere. ballot to the original county elections office.
1104 Palm Street•San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 •805-549-3381 Phone•805-549-3400 Fax•www.assembly.ca.gov/Blakeslee