Organizers have confirmed that attorney Jennifer Hernandez of Holland & Knight and Prof. Ethan Elkind of UCLA will both take part in a panel discussion of SB 375 and SB 743 at the University of San Francisco law school November 4. A third panelist will be Michael Schwartz of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority. Hernandez and Elkind set out strongly worded, antagonistic positions in August on the proposal by California's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to implement SB 743 by shifting from the existing Level of Service (LOS) transportation impact metric under CEQA to a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) metric. The proposal has been championed by advocates for public transportation, bike/pedestrian access and "smart growth" but dreaded by some developers as a source of new uncertainties and obligations under CEQA law. (See http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3560 and http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3582.) Hernandez was the principal author of a fierce criticism published by her firm in August, captioned, " OPR Proposes to Increase CEQA's Costs, Complexity and Litigation Risks with SB 743 Implementation. " Elkind answered it with a critical essay captioned " Misleading Attacks on California's new Transportation Analysis Under CEQA ." A further OPR presentation was scheduled for November 3, so by November 4 the panelists may have further grist for their discussion. See http://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/SB743_Workshop_Notice.pdf. The presentation's webcast may be available later, as with OPR's previous presentation of the type, at http://opr.ca.gov/s_sb743.php. An RSVP form for the USF event is here . Oral argument in Berkeley Hillside set for December 2 The Supreme Court has announced it will hear oral arguments in Los Angeles December 2 in Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (Logan). The case is one of the most significant in a large backlog of CEQA cases currently pending before the State Supreme Court. It concerns the application of a categorical CEQA infill exemption to a proposal for a very large private house, and more generally whether or when "unusual circumstances" can create exceptions to the exemption. A header in the respondents' brief argues: "Appellants have not shown that 'unusual circumstances' should be deleted from the Unusual Circumstances exception." And they argue that the exception is at risk of swallowing the rule. (And see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3314.) The petitioners, Berkeley Hillside Preservation, say they haven't sought to delete the 'unusual circumstances' language. They do argue that a fair argument for significant environmental impacts should still trigger an EIR. The full current list of pending major CEQA cases before the Supreme Court is as follows: - Berkeley Hillside , S201116, oral argument December 2 - Citizens for Environmental Responsibility v. 14th District Agricultural Association (Stars of Justice) , S218240, held awaiting the decision in Berkeley Hillside. - Center for Biological Diversity v Dept of Fish and Wildlife (the Newhall Ranch case), S217763, reply brief due November 26. - California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District , S213478 (the "CEQA In Reverse" case): Fully briefed. - City of San Diego v. Board of Trustees of CSU , S199557, fully briefed. - Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District , S214061, fully briefed. - Sierra Club v. County of Fresno , S219783, opening brief due December 2. In other news -- -  The Calfornia Attorney General issued an opinion clarifying that members of oversight boards for local post-redevelopment successor agencies may not receive compensation or reimbursed expenses from the authority that appoints them. The rule applies to appointing authorities for other oversight boards as well. Amit Palta, of the firm of Best Best & Krieger, LLP, wrote up the opinion on JDSupra . The opinion is at http://oag.ca.gov/system/files/opinions/pdfs/12-902.pdf. - The State Supreme Court turned down a request for depublication of a major case affirming the EIR for a portion of the California High-Speed Rail project. For coverage of the Third District appellate ruling see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3540. - The Los Angeles County Supervisors approved a new "vision statement" for Marina Del Rey. - The city of Tulare adopted a general plan that shrank its Urban Development Boundary by six miles . - The LA Times reported on tensions over the possibility of broader federal tribal recognition policies that could lead to more tribal exercises of sovereignty in places with strictly regulated land use such as Napa. - In what the LA Times called "a new front in the battle over Malibu beach access," Coastal Commission staff sent enforcement warnings over allegations of harassment and high fees for public beach access at the privately run Paradise Cove.

The Coalition for Responsible Arena Development filed a notice of intent to bring a lawsuit against the proposed downtown arena in Sacramento. The group opposing the proposed development claims that the project violates CEQA and is a misuse of public funds. LA Mayor Approves University Village Project Near USC KTLA Mayor Villaraigosa signed off on a $1.1 billion redevelopment project for University Village near USC. The new development includes 350,000 sq. ft. of retail space and new housing and academic areas for students, making it the largest project in the history of South LA. The project's construction could start as early as this year, and will be developed in phases until its expected completion in 2030.  DOF Returns $11 Million To Placer County Modesto Bee After the end of redevelopment in California last year, the state Department of Finance has finally returned the $11 million it has been withholding from Placer County. The county intends to use the funds for highway improvement projects in north Lake Tahoe and Auburn. Central Valley Leaders Work Towards Settling Growth Wars Fresno Bee After the city offered to drop its lawsuit against Madera County's proposal for a 5,200 residential development last week, county officials have agreed to meet with the city to further discuss pending lawsuits and regional growth disputes. In the upcoming meetings, both city and county leaders hope to reach agreement on lawsuit settlements and how the region will grow- hopefully putting the growth wars to rest. Recent Study Shows DTLA Housing is Cheaper Without Parking Curbed LA A study from UCLA's Michael Manville found that housing in DTLA is more affordable if developers don't have to adhere to conventional parking requirements. The study focused on housing provided under the city's Adaptive Reuse Ordinance, which does not require additional parking spaces for additional units. The study found that many buildings offered rental rates that were "unbundled" from parking, providing lower housing options for people without cars- a trend that is not exclusive to DTLA.

2006 is shaping up as a turning point for the state’s enterprise zone program. Not only are 18 of 42 enterprise zones scheduled to expire later this year, but state lawmakers are considering a number of competing bills that would do everything from maintain the status quo to significantly reform the economic development program. This spring, Juan Arambula, chairman of the Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economic Development and the Economy, issued a report calling for increased enterprise zone program accountability, new criteria for designating zones and reforming the hiring tax credit. A few weeks later, the California Budget Project (CBP) issued a study that strongly questions the effectiveness of the enterprise zone program and calls for lawmakers to substantially reduce the program’s size. The report from Arambula (D-Fresno) was the result of hearings regarding the enterprise zone program and includes 45 recommendations. Among other things, Arambula recommended continuing enterprise zone designations through 2008 to give the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) — which took over the program in 2003 — time to complete a thorough review. Other recommendations call for more state oversight, an annual “cost per job created” report by HCD, and changing the hiring tax credit to reduce abuses. In a 14-page response, the California Association of Enterprise Zones (CAEZ) objected to most of Arambula’s recommendations. “The enterprise zone is meant to be a state and local partnership and the state has been absent in providing adequate oversight, marketing of the program nationally and internationally, and assistance/training to the local communities,” CAEZ responded. The report by the CBP, which frequently questions tax breaks, echoed some of Arambula’s recommendations but went much further. The CBP found that enterprise zone tax breaks cost the state $300 million in 2003. “However, numerous studies have failed to establish a link between EZ tax incentives and increased employment, firm growth, or economic development,” the CBP concluded. In the Legislature, economic development bills have moved slowly this year. Among the most far-reaching is SB 1268 (Cedillo), which would require cities, counties and redevelopment agencies to submit biannual reports on every economic development subsidy — including EZ tax credits — of at least $25,000. Arambula’s report and the CAEZ response are available on the CAEZ website, www.caez.org . The CBP report is available at www.cbp.org . Financial assurances intended to ensure that garbage dumps, hazardous waste facilities and surface mines do not degrade environmental and public health are often inadequate, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has concluded. In a new study, the LAO recommended overhauling the financial assurances system to reduce the state’s liability for cleaning up closed waste facilities and mines. “Our review finds that state agencies, when calculating the required dollar amount of financial assurances, frequently do not include all the costs necessary to prevent adverse impacts to the public and the environment,” the LAO reported. The LAO also found that some of the financial assurance mechanisms – especially corporate guarantees and self-insurance — are not very assured. The report cites a California Integrated Waste Management Board study that estimated the state faces a liability of $1.8 billion by mid-century for solid waste facilities. The state’s exposure for surface mines could be as much as $1.2 billion. Maintaining only one hazardous waste site — the BKK landfill in West Covina — is costing the state at least $5.5 million annually, according to the LAO. Coincidentally, the report came out only days after a state appellate court upheld a regulation giving the state Department of Conservation the final say on when local governments may release financial assurances for surface mine reclamation (see ). The LAO recommended: • Broadening the scope of costs covered by financial assurances; • Eliminating a corporate guarantee or corporate financial test as a means of providing financial assurance; • Consolidating all financial assurance functions into one unit at the California Environmental Protection Agency; • Charging a new fee on currently operating waste facilities and surface mines to provide a state fund for long-term maintenance and cleanup. The report, “Financial Assurances: Strengthening Public Safety of Waste Facilities and Surface Mines,” is available on the LAO’s website: www.lao.ca.gov . Affordable housing advocates have sued the City of Mission Viejo over the city’s approval of a 144-unit housing project. Two years ago, the city made clear it would not approve a proposed 168-unit apartment project for low- to moderate-income residents on the same 23-acre site, a stance that was popular with neighbors but not with HCD (see , August 2004). The recently approved project calls for 122 market-rate housing units and 22 affordable units. The Public Law Center, the Legal Aid Society and the California Housing Law Project sued, saying the city had not identified where it would provide its fair share of low- and moderate-income housing. The Carpinteria City Council has adopted in-lieu affordable housing fees that may set a record. The city on the Santa Barbara County coast has an inclusionary zoning ordinance that requires 12%of new housing units to be designated for moderate-income residents. Under the new fee structure, developers that do not provide the affordable units may pay an in-lieu fee of $493,500 per single-family house or $254,330 per condominium. The fee is based on the difference between median market rate prices and the amount that a median-income family can afford. No one has applied to pay the in-lieu fee since the city established it at more than $200,000 per unit in 2004.

A few highlights from this week's news: The First Appellate District cleared the way for a major redevelopment of the ParkMerced apartment complex in southwestern San Francisco. ParkMerced is a rare dense high-rise structure in the western half of the city. See http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A137753.PDF for the opinion. See http://bit.ly/1qpnusx and http://bit.ly/1w8ikcI for coverage of the project plans now unblocked. The California Supreme Court denied requests for both review and depublication on the 218 Properties case on conversion of mobile home parks from rental to owner-occupied status. The online docket is at http://bit.ly/1qpu2am and CP&DR's prior coverage at https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3497. The Huntington Beach City Council took a measure off the ballot that would have invited voters to approve mobile home rent control after the landlord of two key mobile home parks moved toward negotiating five-year leases with his tenants. See the Huntington Beach Independent (noted via the League of CA Cities) at http://bit.ly/1uVVELl. The High-Speed Rail project has had mixed fortunes this month: The State Public Works Board approved a string of 158 properties to acquire in Fresno and Kings Counties ( Fresno Bee at http://bit.ly/1tgY8Sk;  Stoel Rives blog at http://bit.ly/1uVNLWl). The High-Speed Rail Auhority itself met to discuss use of its $250 million in cap-and-trade funds from the upcoming fiscal year's budget. (See http://bit.ly/1rXvMcW). On the other hand, the LA Times ' Ralph Vartabedian wrote that construction on the project has been slowed for lack of authority over land. (See http://lat.ms/1n9fCdC.) And Planetizen has a roundup at http://www.planetizen.com/articles/node-70784 of reports on the appeal by opponents of the recent High-Speed Rail bonds approval decision. (See http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3546.) The LA Times reported a group of landlords and tenants are working together to legalize unpermitted rental units in Los Angeles: http://lat.ms/1uVQejA (Noted via @VamonosLA) Per the Second Appellate District, when a city-owned tree falls on private property, it can constitute a "public improvement" for inverse condemnation purposes. See http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B254800.PDF and http://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-if-tree-falls-city-it-serving-public-purpose. San Francisco's Planning Commission approved the Moscone Center expansion: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/08/15/moscone_growth_spurt.php PG&E pleaded not guilty to federal charges connected with the 2010 San Bruno gas explosion that kiled eight people. The SF Chron 's Bob Egelko reported city officials were campaigning for prosecutors "to seek an independent monitor of the company's conduct, saying state regulators are too cozy with the giant utility," See http://bit.ly/YyNefA. Jennifer Hernandez of Holland & Knight and David Pettit of the NRDC, both CEQA specialists, argued Tesla CEQA exemptions in an August 13 call-in show appearance with business reporter Marc Lifsher on KPCC's "Airtalk" at http://bit.ly/Xib9Q7. AP reported the Ivanpah solar array has become a giant bird zapper: http://bit.ly/1pZVPkg

The Los Angeles City Council has approved initial plans to create a new Economic Development Department (EDD) . City officials hope that the new department, which will work alongside a nonprofit economic development corporation, can serve to replace the now defunct Community Redevelopment Agency. According to a report released by the city's Chief Administrative Officer last week, the creation of the EDD will require consolidation and reorganization of existing city departments, namely of the Community Development Department. As CP&DR previously reported , the consolidation has been in the works for some time and redevelopment wind-down funds may be used. LA Downtown News SF Supervisors Disagree on CEQA Reforms San Francisco Chronicle San Francisco County Supervisor Scott Wiener proposal to streamline the city's review process under the California Environmental Quality Act is moving forward. Proponents argue that the proposed legislation will make the environmental appeals process more legible for everyone, not just land use attorneys. Counter to Wiener's proposed legislation, Supervisor Jane Kim is preparing to release her own CEQA legislation proposal that would better support project appellants.  President Obama's New Budget Gives $130 Million Towards Two LA Metro Projects The Source For the first time, two of Metro's big projects, the Regional Connector and the Purple Line Extension, could receive federal funding. President Obama's proposed 2014  budget, released last week, includes the allocation of $65 million towards each of these two projects. Further, the proposed budget contains a bond program that will subsidize 28% of the bond's interest for major transit projects. Preliminary Data Suggests "Congestion Pricing" in LA Only Half Works LA Times Last fall, L.A. County made its first attempt at "congestion pricing" by opening toll lanes on the 110 Freeway with the hope of reducing congestion during peak traffic times. However, recent data shows that the new toll lanes have caused traffic to speed up only in toll lanes while slowing down traffic in regular lanes. HSR: Governor Seeks Investment From China and Obama's New Budget Washington Examiner, DC Streetsblog There has been a lot of news this week on funding for California's High Speed Rail. Governor Brown was in China trying to land investors to help fund the state's "green" projects, including the HSR. President Obama shows his support for the HSR in the 2014 transportation budget by proposing $40 billion over the next five years in passenger rail programs.

In land use news this week: The State Supreme Court denied review of San Francisco Tomorrow v. City and County of San Francisco (ParkMerced Investors Properties) , Case No. S221844. William Abbott of Abbott & Kindermann recently posted an analysis of this case, which approved a major rebuilding and expansion of the ParkMerced highrise complex in southwestern San Francisco. See also http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3555 . The Strategic Growth Council announced it will move back its meeting on formal adoption of guidelines for the new Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities cap-and-trade grant program. Originally scheduled for December 11, the meeting was moved back to January 20, 2015. Some commenters had sought more review of the proposed guidelines, in part because precise numbers on emissions monitoring and application scoring were still awaited as of the last publicly circulated draft. The League of California Cities' comment was among those asking for more public discussion. For more on comments from advocates for affordable housing and rural areas, and hopes in areas defined as disadvantaged under the program, see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3627 . The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on November 12 certified the EIR for the Antelope Valley Area Plan (AVAP) and gave initial consideration to the Plan itself. The Statement of Proceedings reports the Board certified the EIR, adopted the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopted the plan's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Board did not actually approve the AVAP nor its related zoning changes, instead stating its intent to adopt a list of revisions, including a promise that "if a conflict exists" between the AVAP and "any new or existing Significant Ecological Area (SEA) ordinance" the AVAP would control. (As discussed in CP&DR's news feature on the AVAP at http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3603 , an SEA Ordinance for areas both in and outside the AVAP area is moving on a separate track in the county's General Plan revision process.) The amendments that the Supervisors previewed are mainly technical but in general reduce possible impediments to project approvals. One amendment also spells out the requirement of compliance with the Southern California Association of Governments' Sustainable Communities Strategy. For plan materials see http://planning.lacounty.gov/tnc/ . The Supervisors' Nov. 12 agenda and materials are at http://bos.co.la.ca.us/BoardMeeting/BoardAgendas.aspx . San Francisco's city government announced it would bid to host the 2024 Olympics. The Saltonstall petitioners lost again at the appellate level in their effort to halt construction on the new Sacramento Kings arena. Dale Kasler of the Sacramento Bee has details . Earlier the Bee reported the Kings basketball team released plans for mixed-use residential, commercial and office construction ancillary to their new arena in downtown Sacramento. A lawsuit charging that a tribe did not follow the Williamson Act has been dismissed by a Santa Barbara County judge. The Santa Maria Times reported Judge Timothy Staffel dismissed a lawsuit by the Save the Valley group against Vincent Armenta, as tribal chair of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. According to the paper, the suit alleged that Armenta failed properly to assume responsibility for Williamson Act ag-preservation commitments when the Tribe purchased the 1400-acre Camp 4 property, because the Tribe wrote clauses into the transfer documents "including that nothing in the assumption agreement would limit or erase the tribe's sovereign immunity or change the tribe's terms of ownership." The paper reported Judge Staffel cited the Tribe's sovereign immunity in dismissing the case. The State Water Board issued a proposed ruling November 21 responding to 37 challenges, mainly by municipal governments, to Los Angeles' main MS4 permit, issued November 8, 2012, limiting pollution in runoff from local streets and municipal storm sewers. The permit affects the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers but not Long Beach. The permit imposes Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits on the amounts of trash and specified pollutants allowed to flow out of municipal storm sewers. The water board announced a workshop on the proposed ruling December 16 and set a public comment deadline of January 21, 2015. As of this writing the text had not yet been posted on the Los Angeles area stormwater page of the State Water Board, which is at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/ . The proposed ruling would agree to some revisions in the 2012 permit's language but would essentially uphold it. Among the proposed revisions is an alternative program to reward extra effort toward compliance for dischargers that cannot meet the prescribed water quality standards immediately. The proposed ruling interacts with, but is not directly pursuant to, a major 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on LA-area local governments' responsibility for cleaning up municipal street runoff, NRDC v. County of Los Angeles (2013) 133 S.Ct. 710. (The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a Ninth Circuit offshoot from that case last spring, on which see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3489 for coverage and links to context.) The litigation, however, concerns the 2001 predecessor to the 2012 regulation at issue in the new draft ruling. And in the new draft ruling the water board says the 2013 Supreme Court case "did not invalidate any requirements of the Los Angeles MS4 Order and did not result in any changes to the Order." This summer the EPA featured the Los Angeles runoff permit among several examples of innovation in the field: see http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_ms4_compendium.pdf . The program requires permittees to require building owners to either retain runoff on their property or do something to compensate for failure to do so. The Association of California Water Agencies warns ahead of its conference in San Diego Dec. 2-5 that exhibitors may receive calls from people falsely claiming to be with a company contracted to provide housing for exhibitors. The conference itself has a solid-looking lineup of panels. Sacramento is still courting officials of Major League Soccer, hoping to land an expansion team. The State Supreme Court rejected a depublication request in City of San Diego v. Shapiro , the case invalidating the San Diego special hotel tax district that had been meant to pay for a convention center expansion. For coverage of the underlying case see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3545 . Land use obsessives may or may not find it heartwarming that the Ocean Beach Town Council in San Diego County voted to designate the Ocean Beach Community Plan as grand marshal of the OB Holiday Parade.

Two former Placentia city officials in charge of an ambitious project to lower a five-mile rail corridor have been indicted by an Orange County grand jury. The panel indicted former Public Works Director and city consultant Christopher Becker and retired City Administrator Robert D’Amato on two counts of conflict of interest. The charges stem from a city contract with Becker, whom the city hired as a consultant for the rail corridor project at the same time he was the public works director. Six years ago, the city created the Orange North-American Trade Rail Access Corridor (OnTrac) as a joint powers authority between the city and its redevelopment agency. OnTrac was charged with solving the circulation problem created by the increasingly busy railroad tracks, which cut across every north-south thoroughfare in town. OnTrac chose to pursue a project of placing the rail lines in a 35-foot-deep trench for nearly the length of the city (see , February 2005). The agency completed one railroad overpass, but the city finally abandoned the proposed trench in late 2005, by which time the estimated cost of the trench had doubled to about $600 million. When the city created OnTrac, it signed Becker to a 10-year, $4.5 million consulting contract to serve as OnTrac’s executive director. Becker remained a city employee for another two years. Eventually, the city reworked Becker’s consulting contract at a lower rate, and the city cancelled his contract in November 2005. The grand jury alleged that Becker’s arrangement with the city violated conflict of interest laws. The grand jury alleged that D’Amato, who retired as city administrator in December 2003, violated conflict of interest laws by helping in the formation of the contract with Becker and by not investigating when informed of a potential conflict. Becker has been under fire from project opponents for years and has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. In asserting his client’s innocence, D’Amato’s attorney, Ron Brower, told the , “Everything was done in public. If there was a crime, then the $64 question is, ‘Why wasn’t the entire City Council indicted?’ They knew everything he knew.” The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors is scheduled this month to begin formulating a response to a county grand jury report that was highly critical of the county Planning Commission and an individual commissioner. Supervisors, who have had little good to say about the 13-page report, scheduled a hearing on the matter for this month. In a report released in late March, the grand jury concluded, “It appears that the Planning Commission has attempted to interject itself into matters over which it has no authority and, in the grand jury’s opinion, has become a vehicle for pursuing the personal agenda of some of its members. Further, decisions often do not appear to be made in a fair, consistent and impartial manner and appear to reflect personal bias rather than a fair and impartial review of the facts.” The panel was particularly critical of Commissioner Sarah Christie, a legislative liaison for the Coastal Commission. The grand jury suggested that Christie got the Coastal Commission involved in the county’s Cambria/San Simeon community plan update. The panel recommended that a commissioner abstain on issue when the same issue “is subject to authority or other direct interest of the commissioner’s employer.” The grand jury also recommended that when the Planning Commission denies projects recommended for approval by the Planning Department, appeals to the Board of Supervisors should be free of charge and the Planning Department ought not prepare findings to support the Planning Commission’s decision. The grand jury, which reportedly did not interview planning commissioners, also said the planning director should be able to appeal Planning Commission denials. A number of people have come to the defense of Christie and the Planning Commission. County Administrator David Edge urged supervisors to reject four of the grand jury’s five recommendations, and he said a fifth recommendation — regarding consideration of other commissioners’ opinions — is already policy. In a separate report, County Planning Director Vic Holanda also dismissed many of the panel’s findings and recommendations. San Luis Obispo County has levied a $900,000 “mitigation fee” on a developer who graded the remains of a dormitory at Mission San Miguel while preparing to build a 59-unit housing project. Developer Gordon Marshall bulldozed the site in 2003 in anticipation of developing the housing project. The earthwork, which extended beyond Marshall’s property to the grounds of Mission San Miguel, damaged a site that was home to Salinan Indians during the late 18th and early 19th Centuries. County supervisors, who had earlier supported a $225,000 mitigation fee for the grading, upped the amount to $900,000 in April after hearing testimony from archaeologists about the damage caused and the amount of money needed to complete a scientific excavation of the site. All it took was money to settle lawsuits involving the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. In April, the city agreed to pay the county $36.5 million and to annex some islands of unincorporated land that the county is eager to surrender. The settlements end litigation — the city had already lost two suits in Superior Court — involving a proposed concert hall the county wants to build and a new city plan for North San Jose. Under the agreement, the city will pay the county $7.5 million annually for three years to help build a new crime lab and seismically retrofit county buildings. The city also will provide $11 million for improvements to Montague Expressway and at least $3 million for other traffic projects. The city had sued the county to halt development of a 7,000-seat concert hall at the county-controlled fairgrounds (see , April 2006; , December 2004). The city, which proposed its own concert hall downtown, contended the project violated a city-county pact that prohibits the county from developing anything other than county government facilities. The city lost the lawsuit. The county had counter-sued the city, arguing that the city’s litigation hindered the project’s financing. As part of the settlement, the county dropped that lawsuit. The settlement does not address the proposed concert hall. County officials may soon decide whether to move forward on the project. In an unrelated case, the county sued the city over the North San Jose plan, which would permit up to 32,000 housing units and 27 million square feet of office space in a 5,000-acre district (see , September 2005). The county claimed the city was not mitigating traffic impacts outside the city. Again, the county won in court. In that case, the settlement does address the issue at hand by providing at least $14 million for traffic improvements. Housing development in San Francisco’s eastern neighborhoods could slow dramatically, as the city’s supervisors are refusing to approve projects without an analysis of how market-rate housing projects affect affordable housing and industrial jobs. The requirement could slow approximately 50 proposed housing projects totaling about 4,600 units in the Soma, Mission, Showplace Square and Potrero Hill districts. Civic activists contend the housing development — primarily in the form of upper-end condominiums and lofts — is displacing low-income residents and blue-collar workers from working-class and industrial areas. City planners are conducting a comprehensive review, which is expected to take about a year. A number of project proponents are preparing their own individual studies in hopes of winning approval before the city completes its review. The Sierra Nevada Conservancy has released a draft strategic plan that is intended the guide the agency — which covers one-quarter of the state — for the next five years. The plan is quite general, and the only identified goals are those that were contained in the legislation creating the conservancy, such as increasing tourism and recreation, conserving physical and cultural resources, and improving water quality. The plan does lay out a number of institutional and resources challenges, including “a lack of knowledge about the importance of the Sierra Nevada region by a majority of Californians living outside of the area.” The plan also lists action steps. The plan is available on the conservancy’s website: www.sierranevada.ca.gov . A comprehensive, annotated glossary of statutes for local government operations has been compiled by the state Senate Local Government Committee. The “Quick List” also contains instructions for retrieving official documents and a list of relevant public agency and private enterprise websites. The Quick List is available at the committee’s website, under reference materials, www.sen.ca.gov/locgov/REFERENCES.htp .

Less than a day before trial, the California High-Speed Rail Authority and Madera/Fresno farming organizations a nnounced they had reached a settlement -- dissolving the last legal challenge to the first segment of California's HSR. According to Anja Raudabaugh, executive director of the Madera Farm Bureau, the rail authority offered significant concessions including increased mitigation for agricultural impacts and compensation for landowners who are affected by the project. Those representing farmers' interest in the Central Valley agree that the settlement concessions likely exceed what would have been afforded to them if they prevailed in the CEQA lawsuit. Now that the last lawsuit has been settled, the rail authority must deal with the implications of the federal Surface Transportation Board having authority over the project. Nevertheless, the rail authority believes it construction on the Madera to Bakersfield segment will begin this summer. Does Muni Need More Funding To Meet Regional Targets? SF Streetsblog In response to last week's approval of SF's ten-year Capital Plan, Supervisor Scott  Wiener claims that Muni will only get worse if officials do not initiate more funds for the underfunded transit system. Under the current proposed spending plan, Muni would get allotted $300 million, an amount well below SFMTA's estimated need of $510 million per year. In addition, MTC recently released its draft for Plan Bay Area , which promotes the widening of highways to create high occupancy toll lanes rather than using existing lanes. Critiques of this plan argue that this logic follows outdated Caltrans practices that cannot be used to solve 21st century transit problems and falls short of addressing other exasperating issues, such as decreasing traffic crashes by 50% and improving walking and biking by 70%. The final plan is scheduled for adoption in July.  New Community Plan May Overturn South LA's Fast Food Ban KCET In 2008, the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance banning the development of new, stand-alone fast food restaurants in South LA. The ban was intended to encourage the development of grocery stores and increase the community's access to healthy food options by limiting the amount of fast food restaurants in the area. Now the ban could be overturned as part of the area's new proposed Community Plan. Although the proposed plan is not yet official, its potential override of the fast food ban has sparked a debate among health advocates and those who are skeptical over how planning and policy can fix 'food deserts'. LA Mayor's Budget Includes Consolidation of City's Two Biggest Agencies LA Times Last week, L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa released his proposed $7.7 billion budget -- essentially focused on reversing cuts and layoffs for city services.  The proposed budget also includes the consolidation of the Department of Planning and the Department of Building and Safety, and the creation of a new Economic Development Department that would aim to replace the functions of the (now defunct) CRA.  City Council will hold public hearings before voting on the budget next month.

Voters in Monterey County may be closer to deciding two land use ballot measures after a 15-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in an unrelated case that recall petitions need not be circulated in multiple languages. Last year, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled that petitions in a Santa Ana Unified School District recall were invalid because they had been circulated only in English. In March, a federal district court judge, relying on the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, declared invalid an initiative to overhaul the Monterey County general plan because initiative backers printed petitions only in English. After the general plan ruling, the county Board of Supervisors pulled off the ballot a referendum of a proposed 1,100-unt housing project for the same reason (see , May 2006). Under the Voting Rights Act, the government must publish election materials in other languages if more than 5% of voters speak a language other than English. However, the panel that reheard the Santa Ana school district case voted 14-1 that the multi-lingual requirement does not apply to citizen petitions. Requiring translation of citizen petitions “is very likely to have a chilling effect on the petition process itself,” Judge William Canby wrote for the court. “A requirement of translation for recall petitions is far more likely to be used as a sword than as a shield.” Exactly what will happen with the Monterey County land use measures is unclear. Proponents said they would push for a special election because it is too late to get the initiative and the referendum on the November ballot. But county officials said they were still studying the situation and noted that a U.S. Supreme Court review of the Ninth Circuit decision is possible. Additionally, litigation over the two ballot measures is pending in federal court. The Ninth Circuit case is , No. 03-56259, 06 C.D.O.S. 8808, and was filed on September 19. While growth control votes in Monterey County remained in question, the county and the City of Salinas reached a settlement in the city’s lawsuit over county plans for the 2,500-acre Rancho San Juan. The county has been planning for growth on the ranch just north of Salinas for some time, but the city sued over a specific plan, which includes the 1,100-unit Butterfly Village project for which a referendum is pending (see above.) The city agreed to drop its California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit when the City Council and Board of Supervisors approved an 18-point “Greater Salinas Area Memorandum of Understanding.” The document permits the city to annex about 3,000 acres north of town, designates land to the north and east of the city for development while preserving farmland to the west and south, requires imposition of a countywide traffic impact fee, and calls for county-city cooperation on issues such as affordable housing and infrastructure improvements. Salinas officials said the city needs room to grow because of severe overcrowding and a lack of affordable housing. Rancho San Juan growth opponents immediately seized on the settlement and closed-door negotiations behind it, and the opponents hinted they may file a suit insisting that the settlement should be subject to environmental review. A referendum contesting adoption of a redevelopment plan for the Bayview Hunters Point district in San Francisco has been blocked by City Attorney Dennis Herrera. He declared the referendum petitions were invalid because they did not contain the entire redevelopment plan. The city adopted the plan, which emphasizes development of 3,700 new housing units in the 1,300-acre project area, earlier this year (see , September 2006). Fearing gentrification, opponents gathered enough signatures on a referendum petition to force an election. But Herrera determined on September 19 that the petitions were invalid without the plan itself. Opponents said they would likely sue over Herrera’s decision. A controversial proposal by Santa Clara County to build a 7,000-seat concert hall at the county fairgrounds in San Jose is apparently dead after the Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 not to pursue the project. The decision came shortly after county analysts revealed that rising construction costs would require at least a $15 million county subsidy. The county began pursuing a concert hall at the aging fairgrounds in 1998, shortly before the City of San Jose and downtown advocates began talking about building a similar hall in downtown. Eventually, the county decided on a plan in which it would issue about $80 million in bonds to pay for the fairgrounds facility and hire the House of Blues to run it. The city sued and lost one round in court before paying to settle the lawsuit (see , May 2006; , December 2004). Backers of the county project said it could generate tens of millions of dollars for the county over the next three decades. But when it came time to move forward, three supervisors said the project was too risky, especially when the county already has a $200 million budget shortfall. The county’s decision may give new life to the proposed downtown concert hall, which has languished. Yolo County has dropped its eminent domain action to acquire 17,300 acres of farmland and open space in a triangle between the cities of Woodland, West Sacramento and Davis. Instead, the county reached an agreement with the property owners that limits development and water sales. The county commenced eminent domain proceedings on the Conaway Ranch more than two years ago because of concerns about the loss of farmland, endangered species habitat and water (see , August 2004). After eminent domain proceedings began, a collection of Sacramento area developers acquired the ranch, which has 50,000 acre-feet of water rights. Under the settlement, the owners may sell up to 1,500 acres of land in small parcels. For sales of parcels larger than 250 acres, the county will have the right of first refusal. All land remains subject to the county general plan, which currently permits virtually no development. The agreement calls for water to be used first to satisfy farming, habitat and recreation needs on Conaway Ranch. Surplus water could be sold but the county would have the first right to negotiate a water purchase and would receive a cut of proceeds if another entity buys the water. Property owners said they may use the land as a mitigation bank and sell conservation easements. On-the-ground restoration of San Dieguito Lagoon in Del Mar began in September after 15 years of planning, permitting processes and litigation. The restoration plan by the San Dieguito River Park Joint Powers Authority calls for creation of a 115-acre saltwater marsh, construction and rehabilitation of nesting sites for endangered birds, and permanently reopening the mouth of the river (see , September 2003). Construction is expected to take two years. Southern California Edison is paying for the project as mitigation for ongoing operation of the San Onofre nuclear power plant about 30 miles to the north.

Post-redevelopment plans for downtown San Diego The San Diego Foundation is teaming up with the Downtown San Diego Partnership business group to frame a  new vision for San Diego's downtown. With the end of redevelopment agencies in the state, San Diego can no longer depend on the $125 million dollars a year to subsidize these types of projects.  SF redesigns Castro Street to better accommodate pedestrians  San Francisco's famous Castro Street is undergoing a design makeover to transform the street into a better environment for pedestrians. Castro Street, with its narrow sidewalks and busy intersections, is not suitable for the heavy foot traffic that dominates the area. The Castro Street Design Plan builds upon previous efforts to improve the street's conditions for pedestrians and enhance the street's capacity to serve as a local hot spot and tourist destination.  Realigning High Speed Rail may compromise SF freeway San Francisco officials explore alternative High Speed Rail alignments, including the removal of the I-280 viaduct. The proposal could benefit both the city and Caltrain, though details for how this proposal would align with Caltrain's electrification plans still need to be worked out. Stakeholders agree: Modernize CEQA ... After 40 years, stakeholders agree that the time has come to modernize CEQA. Governor Jerry Brown and other political coalitions have made strong commitments to CEQA modernization in the upcoming year.  ... But Enviros Aren't On Board Bruce Reznick and David Mogavero of Planning & Conservation League say that the call for CEQA reform is much ado about nothing. LA publishes DEIR for 5-year bike plan and the "My Figueroa Project"  The Draft EIR encompasses 39.5 miles of bicycle lane projects that require the removal of street lanes and promises streetscape improvements and better accessibility for bicyclists. The city is using Governor Brown's new law (A.B. 2245) that allows certain bicycle projects to be exempt from the CEQA process to opt-out of the EIR certification process.   Metro unveils study on how to close the 710 Freeway gap The final five recommendations on how to close Los Angeles's 710 Freeway gap were released by Metro last Friday. Options include: do nothing, traffic management systems, light rail, bus route and freeway tunnel.  Metro will host open houses starting this week to discuss its findings.

A “preliminary master plan” for the Orange County Great Park has been approved by the park board. The plan for 1,655 acres of the former El Toro Marine Corps base divides the park into a series of “activity levels,” ranging from nature areas with wildlife viewing to a large sports park. There would be a “lifelong learning district,” a botanic garden, a conservatory that spans a manmade canyon, air and military museums, 50 miles of trails and an orange hot-air balloon rising 500 feet to serve as an icon. During a presentation to the Irvine City Council, park designer Ken Smith called the release of the preliminary plan “momentous,” but he emphasized that the plan is a work in progress. Councilwoman Christine Shea, who helped lead the fight against a proposed airport at El Toro, said it was “amazing” to see the park vision come to light “after so many years of struggle.” While the early park plans have earned high praise, some Irvine residents are urging caution. After Smith made his presentation to the City Council, one resident said he was concerned to see the estimate of park attendance rise from 1.2 million to 5 million visitors per year. The Great Park board is scheduled to adopt a comprehensive master plan in early 2007, with construction to follow. The preliminary master plan is available at www.ocgp.org All 23 Enterprise Zones scheduled to expire this year have been given an additional 15 years by Gov. Schwarzenegger. New or existing businesses in Enterprise Zones are eligible for tax credits for hiring certain employees or purchasing equipment, and may take advantage of other financial incentives. Analysts have given Enterprise Zones mixed reviews during recent years, with some questioning the benefits of a program that costs the state tens of millions of dollars annually (see , June 2006; , February 2002). But Schwarzenegger cited a report released in August by the Department of Housing and Community Development that asserted poverty and unemployment rates declined faster in Enterprise Zones than statewide from 1990 to 2000, and that income increased faster than the state average. The extended Enterprise Zones are: City of Arvin, Delano, Fresno-City, Fresno-County, Merced, North Sacramento, Yuba Sutter, Calexico, City of San Bernardino, Coachella, City of Los Angeles-Central/Hollywood, Compton, Santa Clarita, Long Beach, Pasadena, City of Southgate/Lynwood, San Diego, Richmond, San Francisco, San Jose, Shasta, Eureka and Oroville. for a Highway 50 freeway interchange in El Dorado County that would serve a controversial Indian casino has been upheld. Last year, the Third District Court of Appeal rejected an EIR for the Shingle Springs interchange because of the analysis of air quality issues (see , January 2006). However, a revised version survived the scrutiny of Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly, who in November ruled against the citizens group Voices for Rural Living. The group promised to appeal the ruling, but it is the second major blow to the group’s efforts to halt the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians from building a casino resort. In September, the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors agreed to drop its litigation over the project in exchange for the tribe’s payment of up to $190 million over 20 years for law enforcement, and transportation and other projects. An environmental impact report offering 10 alternatives for the future of the Salton Sea has been released by the state Department of Water Resources (DWR). The alternatives range from doing nothing to making a smaller lake to devising a series of lakes and brine ponds, with costs ranging from about $1 billion to $6 billion over 75 years. State officials have yet to embrace an alternative, and neither environmentalists nor local farmers appear thrilled with any of the ideas. But nearly everyone says the state needs to chose a course of action quickly because the 360-mile lake will lose about half of its water flow starting in 2017 due to water diversions from Imperial County farms to the San Diego region. An important resource for migratory birds, the lake is experiencing rising salinity, fish die-offs and other ecological problems. With less runoff from farms, the Salton Sea could become a hazard to animals and humans. The Salton Sea Authority, a local joint powers authority, called the state’s EIR “obsolete.” The authority supports a plan to create a separate “salt sink” next to a much smaller lake with better water quality. The Resources Agency anticipates recommending a preferred alternative to the Legislature in the spring. The EIR is available on a DWR website: www.saltonsea.water.ca.gov . The state budget situation is not as big a problem for local governments as it was two years ago, according to a recent survey of city officials. In the survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, the League of California Cities and the National League of Cities, 66% of respondents said the state budget is a “big problem” for cities. That percentage was down from 76% in 2005 and 90% in 2004. In addition, the percentage of city officials who said California’s system of public finance needs “major changes” dropped from 76% in 2005 to 45% in 2006. Not surprisingly, city officials also said their local budgets are in better shape this year than during the recent past. The complete survey regarding local government finance and infrastructure is available at www.ppic.org

Although many land use bills failed to avoid Arnold Schwarzenegger’s veto pen, the governor did sign some pieces of land use legislation this fall. One approved bill, SB 1535 (Kuehl), increased the filing fees for environmental documents to be reviewed by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG). The bill bumps up the cost of filing an EIR from $800 to $2,500, and boosts the negative declaration fee from $1,250 to $1,800. According to environmental groups that supported the bill, DFG reviews only about 10% of the environmental documents it receives because of funding and staff shortages. The DFG fees for reviewing environmental documents prepared by other agencies are unique in state government; no other agency has such a fee. Developers have chafed at the fees and local governments have complained about having to collect the money, but courts have upheld the fees (see , May 2000). The fees had gone unchanged for years. The additional revenue should enable DFG to review all environmental documents it receives, according to bill supporters. While the DFG fee bill affects the entire state, another bill signed by the governor, AB 1457 (Baca), impacts only one dark corner of San Bernardino. The legislation is a creative attempt to revitalize a troublesome park, decrease criminal activity and provide new housing. The legislation permits the City of San Bernardino to give 14 acres of the 43-acre Seccombe Lake Park to the city’s redevelopment agency, which must come up with replacement parkland nearby. The redevelopment agency wants to sell the property for private development of up to 80 houses and town homes in a new, gated community. The city acquired the downtown parkland through purchase and eminent domain after World War II and deeded it to the state about 25 years ago for development of a regional park. That plan died, though, and the state returned the park to the city. For years, the park has been the site of homeless encampments and criminal behavior — and not much baseball or recreational fishing. Earlier this year, though, the city began removing walls and overgrown vegetation to open up sight lines. City officials hope the cleanup and planned housing project will entice more people to recreate in the park. A bill that would give property owners with land use disputes direct access to federal court has passed the House of Representatives and could be taken up by the Senate this month. The proposed Private Property Rights Implementation Act, HR 4772 by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), would permit property owners to bypass state courts and take claims over local land use regulation directly to federal court. As it now stands, federal courts generally require property owners to go to state court first with claims that regulation has deprived them of property rights or civil rights. However, at least in the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, federal courts have been reluctant to consider claims that have been decided in state court. Thus, it is difficult for property owners to get heard in federal court, which many people believe would be a more favorable venue for property owners than state court. Although passage of HR 4772 is a long shot during the lame-duck congressional session, local governments are worried. The bill would undermine local zoning authority and “create greater federal intrusion into local land use decisions,” according to the National League of Cities. In one of the more lopsided land use elections in state history, Glendora voters rejected an elaborate rezoning initiative that would have permitted development of 338 houses on the site of a private country club and construction of a new golf course in the rugged hills above town. The developer-written “Glendora Hillside Protection Ordinance” received only 9.4% of the 12,455 ballots cast during the special election on October 3. Developer NJD, Ltd., for years has been attempting to build houses on about 400 acres in the hills of Glendora and the neighboring city of San Dimas. But those efforts have gone nowhere at City Hall and in court. So the developer went directly to voters. Under the initiative, NJD would have essentially swapped its 400 acres in the hills for the 107 acres owned by the Glendora Country Club. The developer would build the country club a new golf course and other facilities in the hills. The developer would also build 338 houses on the relatively flat land now occupied by the 50-year-old country club. The initiative proposed amending the city’s general plan, and city zoning and grading ordinances to permit the new golf course and homes — although part of the golf course would have been built in San Dimas, which has not consented to the project. Country club members agreed to the land swap earlier this year. NJD spent more than $1 million on the campaign and went as far as offering people grocery and gasoline gift cards if they agreed to fill out absentee ballots. After the overwhelming defeat, NJD representatives said they would again try to receive city approval for building up to 53 houses in the hills. El Dorado County officials have reached an agreement with the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians regarding a long-discussed casino just off Highway 50, a few miles west of Placerville. The agreement calls for the tribe to pay $104 million over 20 years for construction of carpool lanes on Highway 50, at least $78 million over 20 years to mitigate impacts on the community and $500,000 annually for local law enforcement, and for the tribe to offer hiring preferences for construction and casino jobs to El Dorado County residents. The tribe has talked about building a 200,000-square-foot casino and 250-room hotel since 1998, but the county and landowners in the rural residential neighborhood next to the tribe’s 160-acre reservation have fought the project. Late last year, the Third District Court of Appeal threw out the environmental impact report for a freeway interchange that would serve the casino (see , January 2006). The citizens group involved in that litigation, Voices for Rural Living, filed a new lawsuit in September over the proposed interchange, which is vital for the casino. A Superior Court judge has thrown out an environmentalists’ lawsuit that contends the continued operation of windmills in the Altamont Pass area violates the state’s unfair competition law and the public trust doctrine. The Center for Biological Diversity argued that the windmills — located along Interstate 580 between Livermore and Tracy — are illegal because they destroy wildlife, which is a public trust. However, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Bonnie Sabraw ruled that harm to wildlife does not equate to the destruction of property under the unfair competition law. Environmentalists filed the creative lawsuit after failing to convince Alameda County and power companies to close down older windmills that state officials blame for killing about 1,000 raptors annually, including golden eagles, red-tailed hawks and burrowing owls (see , August 2005). Environmentalists say operation of the windmills violates federal and state wildlife protection laws. An appeal of Judge Sabraw’s ruling is possible, according to Jeff Miller, of the Center for Biological Diversity. Under a county-approved plan, power companies have closed some old power turbines and are supposed to replace the rest over 13 years with fewer, larger models that are expected to be safer for birds. The case is , Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG04183113.