Regional land use planning efforts appear to be gaining momentum in several portions of California, with San Diego County heading toward a potential "regional authority." Business interests, frustrated that no entity addresses many cross-jurisdictional issues, appear to be a major driver of the regional approaches. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg also has shown himself to be a regionalist, and a commission he appointed last year continues to formulate recommendations. However, many cities, counties and existing councils of government remain skeptical about new regional approaches — especially those that involve tax-sharing, decreased local control and creation of new agencies. Looming large in the background of the regional planning debate is a possible statewide ballot initiative backed by the cities and counties that could lock in property tax levels. More people are talking about the need for regional approaches, but implementation is difficult, said Carol Whiteside, president of the Great Valley Center and a member of the Speaker's Commission on Regionalism. "The thing gets bogged down when you start talking about governance," she said. Elisa Barbour and Michael Teitz of the Public Policy Institute of California, in a paper prepared for the Speaker's Commission, summed up the current system: "The crux of the regional planning problem is how to develop coordinated policies to address problems that are regional in scope in the absence of general-purpose governments operating at a regional scale." Several other states have far more extensive regional — and even statewide — planning systems than California. In this state, single-function agencies and special districts arose after World War II. Those entities have remained in place while proponents of new, multi-function agencies have met stiff resistance from local government and taxpayers groups complaining about a "new layer of government." And no one has dared talk about a state plan since the Jerry Brown administration. The result is a fragmented planning system ill-suited to addressing the state's densely populated regions. Barbour and Teitz identified deficiencies in the current system: "The state-led planning agencies were organized along single-purpose functional lines, and they traditionally have not coordinated plans. Thus, the system is horizontally fractured. The regional agencies have no direct control over local land use, although their policies are often directly related to land use patterns. So the system is also vertically fractured. Local land use decisions often drive the planning process because regional agencies must take local plans and projections as given." Speaker's Commission Moves Forward In announcing creation of the Commission on Regionalism last fall, Hertzberg talked about the "Winchester Mystery House effect" that results from more than 5,000 cities, counties and special districts working independently. Hertzberg, who has shown strong interest in local government, pitched three propositions: "First, the current structure of government in California today is outdated and poorly equipped to deal with many of the issues of the day. Second, the winners in the new economy will be the people — and the businesses — in well-run regions. And third and finally, because the new economy will reward successful regions, it's time for California to give regionalism a new look." Hertzberg tabbed Nick Bollman, president of the California Center for Regional Leadership, as chairman of the new Commission. In July, Bollman said the Commission has taken a different approach than previous panels that tackled the subject. The Commission recognizes that local fiscal certainty is essential for getting good regional decisions, the Commission wants to allow different regions to try different approaches, and the Commission sees no magic bullet answers, Bollman said. He believes the Commission's work will result in legislative proposals this summer. The Commission addressed state-local fiscal issues first because "without the right fiscal signals, all the best intentions about planning are meaningless," Bollman said. In April, the Commission adopted 20 recommendations, many of which drew on the work of previous task forces. Many of the proposals are aimed at keeping the state's hands off local revenues, reducing local government's reliance on sales tax and boosting the share of property tax received by local government. Next on the Commission's agenda was collaborative regional decision-making. Bollman and others believe it is essential to establish outcome goals on issues such as housing and transportation. Then the state needs to facilitate a system in which regions could work toward meeting those goals. This is not an entirely new idea, but the Commission has gone further by suggesting that state agencies have a seat at the regional table. Bollman pointed to Caltrans' extensive participation in Riverside County's process that integrates its general plan, transportation plan and habitat plan as a good model. The Commission might recommend creation of a state-chartered, public-private entity to help manage the realignment of interests around regional strategies. This new entity would monitor progress and might even have dollars to award and the ability to waive regulations, Bollman said. The last piece would be a "new regional governance" that ensures collaborative planning without creation of new regional governments. "This really is about strengthening the ability of local agencies, regional agencies and state agencies to do their jobs better," he said. Whiteside, of the Great Valley Center, is skeptical that legislative proposals emerging from the Commission will get far this year because of the Capitol's focus on electricity. But the Commission does get people talking and it exposes different models — all of which could lead to experimentation by existing agencies. For Whiteside, flexible approaches — and even flexible boundaries — are essential. Housing issues might spread over one area, habitat concerns could have different boundaries, and transportation plans might cover a different area yet, she said. Such flexibility can make things complicated and raise accountability issues, but rigid boundaries make no sense, she said. "The challenge is to make this operate seamlessly because the people don't care about the structure. They care about results," Whiteside said. How much progress the Commission will make remains uncertain, but Bollman believes now is the time. "There appears to be a kind of golden convergence," he said. "It's clear to all of the interest groups that coalesce around these issues that we are in a near crisis mode with regard to planning for the population growth that we will have." Regis Gets Attention in San Diego Legislation last year by state Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon) forced San Diego to reconsider its local and regional planning processes. Peace originally proposed a bill that would have merged five existing entities, including two transportation boards and the port authority, into one super agency. Local officials eventually convinced Peace to tame the measure, which instead created the 11-member San Diego Regional Government Efficiency Commission (RGEC, or Regis). The commission's final report was due to the Legislature August 1. In June, RGEC recommended creation of a regional airport authority with an appointed nine-member board. A key part of the recommendation is that the airport authority be armed with the power to override (with a two-thirds vote) local decisions to block a new airport. San Diego area officials have talked for decades about a new international airport either to compliment or to replace the highly constrained Lindbergh Field. However, no consensus has ever been reached on a site. The primary mission of the new authority would be to select a site and build an airport. The panel's more controversial proposal concerns a regional land use agency. In late July, it appeared the panel would recommend creation of a new regional authority for San Diego County. If state lawmakers agree with that idea, voters would decide next year, said Kirk Mather, consultant to RGEC. The idea is to establish a seven- to nine-member elected body — either entirely new or the county Board of Supervisors plus a few additions — that would have some level of authority over development and conservation decisions across the county. "If you look at where we are headed in the next 20 to 30 years, San Diego will have another 1 million people," said Byron Wear, a San Diego city councilman and chairman of RGEC. "Sixty percent of them will be our children and our grandchildren. We have to revise our land use plans." The general plans for San Diego County and its 18 cities are about 150,000 units short of meeting the need, he said. Officials at the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) have not reacted favorably. Ramona Finnila, a Carlsbad city councilwoman and chairwoman of SANDAG, said SANDAG has addressed 26 different topics, ranging from affordable housing and transportation planning, to electricity restructuring and beach sand replenishment. "We think we have an excellent model of regional government right here," Finnila said. SANDAG has a smart growth strategy and an economic development plan and is already providing incentives for transit-oriented developments, she said. "We have got all these things that other areas are just talking about getting," Finnila said. Wear and others respond that their gripe is not with SANDAG itself but with SANDAG's lack of authority and its structure that gives small communities disproportionate say in regional debates. "There is a feeling," said Mather, "that SANDAG may be the best COG in the country, but we deserve better. We need something with some teeth in it. … We need a regional plan." The proposed regional authority would adopt a regional land use plan based on carrying capacity, Wear said. He favors an incentive-based approach that would, for example, provide more discretionary funding for a city that approves high-density housing near a transit corridor. The new entity would not have absolute control, and there would be a system to allow small town officials to be heard, Wear said. The regional authority could look similar to the advisory council that makes a variety of development and public services decisions in Portland, Oregon, Mather added. But Finnila is not convinced, and she criticized state lawmakers for creating a hurried process and providing no funding. "There has not been a good process in this commission. It lacked the time to do a good job. It lacked the time to study issues rather than get an overview," Finnila argued. Instead, she said, everyone should wait for the report from the Speaker's Commission. The state should then provide resources for whichever region wants to serve as a "guinea pig" for the Commission's recommendations, she said. Tax Sharing in Sacramento A bill by Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) would make a seven-county region into a test case. The bill stalled this year but will return next year, according to a Steinberg aide. In its latest form, the bill would allocate all growth in sales tax revenue in the region by population. The bill would also divert money from the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund to establish "smart growth land use projects" in the region. The bill establishes air quality credits for jurisdictions that adopt smart growth plans. Those credits could be sold to new power plants, with revenue funding open space acquisition. During hearings, Steinberg said he wanted to prevent jurisdictions from competing with one another for sales-tax producing retail development. He said jurisdictions should cooperate so that such developments are built in the best locations. Steinberg originally proposed using state funds to backfill any jurisdiction that lost money under the new formula, but few people expect that provision to fly. The cities of Roseville and Elk Grove became two of the leading opponents of the bill. In the last decade, the western Placer County city of Roseville has approved extensive retail developments and a huge auto mall. Elk Grove, a year-old Sacramento County city, recently approved a 295-acre shopping mall. Those cities have made decisions based on existing fiscal conditions, and it is unfair to change the rules, said Daniel Carrigg, a lobbyist for the League of California Cities. The trouble with AB 680 and many of the Speaker's Commission's recommendations is that they do not expand the pie, they simply re-slice it, said Carrigg, who decried the nine-year-old ERAF shift of property taxes from cities and counties to schools. Changing formulas for allocating the same amount of money does not ensure that governments will make "better" land use decisions or that developers will proposed different projects, he said. "One of the first things we would say is, you need to ask local governments what tools they need," Carrigg said. In fact, that is Steinberg's latest tack. Because the top-down approach failed, Steinberg has asked local officials to reach common ground and propose language for a revised bill next year. Whiteside called AB 680 "timely and relevant" and noted that it has engaged many people. "I think that the Sacramento region is a great one to try this in because it's not so huge like Los Angeles is. It has a lot of growth potential, and it has a pretty strong center city with revenue issues. And it has a very well defined set of first-ring suburbs with declining sales tax revenue," Whiteside said. Other Efforts A number of other entities also are discussing or pursuing regional planning. The Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development, a collection of business, environmental and other entities, continues its four-year effort on a compact for sustainable growth in the Bay Area. Related to that, the Association of Bay Area Governments and other existing regional entities are pursuing a "smart growth strategy" to assist cities and developers. Contra Costa County Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier has urged the Legislature to create a Bay Area Regional Coordinating Council that would tackle a wide variety of issues. DeSaulnier has also proposed merging ABAG and the Metropolitan Transit Commission. An informal collection of officials from local government in the Sacramento region has formed the Sacramento Regional Partnership to discuss transportation, land use and social issues. Also, business and civic leaders have formed Valley Vision, which has scheduled a series of gatherings to discuss regional issues this summer and fall. Riverside County continues work on its integrated plan. While not truly a regional effort, proponents of regionalism are encouraged by Riverside County's decision to craft plans all at once for development, habitat conservation and transportation. Sources: Nick Bollman, California Center for Regional Leadership, (415) 882-7300. Carol Whiteside, Great Valley Center, (209) 522-5103. Byron Wear, San Diego city councilman, (619) 236-6622. Ramona Finnila, Carlsbad city councilwoman, (760) 434-2830. Daniel Carrigg, League of California Cities, (916) 658-8200. Speaker's Commission on Regionalism website: www.regionalism.org/ San Diego Regional Government Efficiency Commission website: www.sdrgec.org/ Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development website: www.bayareaalliance.org