Search Results

The Navy has asked incoming governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to block a proposed new town on the Tejon Ranch because the development would hinder national security. The Navy has also asked the new administration “to facilitate coordinated master planning of the entire Tejon Ranch, across local jurisdictions, with special consideration of input from DoD regarding military training and testing requirements.” The new town, called Centennial, is proposed to have 23,000 housing units and 14 million square feet of office, industrial and retail space near the junction of Interstate 5 and Highway 138, about 25 miles north of Santa Clarita (see CP&DR Local Watch, April 2003). According to an October 21 letter to the incoming administration from Navy Rear Admiral J.L. Betancourt, military airplanes regularly fly training and testing missions within 200 feet of ground level in the area of the proposed development. “ t is likely that the Tejon Ranch project is just the beginning of the development of this portion of the Antelope Valley,” according to a Navy report. “Such development, if realized, could result in substantive land use conflicts underlying current training areas and could likely pose a threat to continued use of training routes.” Betancourt pointed to 2002 legislation, AB 1468 (Knight), that requires general plans to account for potential land use conflicts with military bases, and which gives the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research authority to resolve disputes. He suggested proposed development could be pushed to the northern portion of the 270,000-acre Tejon Ranch, in the San Joaquin Valley. Tejon Ranch President and Chief Executive Officer Bob Stine called the letter “politically driven” and said environmental groups were using the military to halt development. He noted that 43 individuals and groups — ranging from federal, state and local lawmakers to the Sierra Club — were on the letter’s carbon copy list. “Certainly we were surprised because we’ve been in the planning process for the Centennial project for three years, all of the information for the project was submitted to the public in August 2002, and the military has never contacted us,” Stine said. Tejon Ranch officials are willing to cooperate with the military, and involvement from the governor’s office is not warranted, Stine added. The Rohnert Park City Council has approved an agreement with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria under which the tribe will pay the city, a school district and community groups $200 million over 20 years to mitigate impacts of a proposed casino and resort. The City Council’s mid-October vote came while casino opponents worked on a recall of the four councilmembers who voted for the agreement. Meanwhile, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors rejected an offer of $120 million from the tribe because the money came under the condition that the county not oppose the proposed development — a condition Rohnert Park accepted. Still, a recall of three supervisors, including two who voted against the tribe’s offer, is also underway. The Graton Rancheria has proposed the largest casino in Northern California on 360 acres of farmland west of Rohnert Park. Besides what might be the largest gambling floor in the state, the facility would also have a 300-room hotel and a 2,000-seat auditorium. Station Casinos of Las Vegas, which joined with a different tribe to open a casino near Roseville in June, would help develop and operate the facility. The land is not held in trust for the tribe — a requirement for an Indian casino. However, the 2000 federal legislation that gave legal recognition to the tribe mandates the Interior Department take into trust any land the tribe requests. Under the approved revenue-sharing plan, the tribe will pay the city $15 million up front for road work, $2.7 in in-lieu development fees, and $3 million for new police and fire facilities. In addition, the tribe will pay annually for 20 years $6 million, including $1 million designated for housing, to the city; $1 million to the Cotati-Rohnert Park School District; and $2 million to community nonprofit organizations. The agreement has escape provisions for the tribe, including the tribe’s failure to reach a certain compact with the state. The deal would provide more money for local government than any other agreement involving a gaming tribe. The Corona Redevelopment Agency should reimburse hundreds of thousands of dollars of low- and moderate-income housing funds (LMIHF or low/mod funds) that the city used to purchase and operate emergency shelters, a Department of Housing and Community Development audit has concluded State auditors found that Corona spent $400,000 in low/mod funds to purchase one shelter and spent $250,000 over three years to help the Salvation Army operate the facility. The redevelopment agency spent another $94,000 of low/mod funds to help run an emergency and transitional housing facility for domestic violence victims. Low- and moderate-income housing funds must be used for permanent or transitional housing, and not for short-term emergency shelter, states the audit, which was released at the end of September. Corona Redevelopment and Economic Development Director Jim Bradley responded that redevelopment law is not clear cut and he rejected HCD’s interpretation. “To adopt a narrow definition of what qualifies as housing for purposes of LMIHF expenditures would most likely result in the closure or reduction of numerous emergency and other non-traditional housing venues throughout the state,” Bradley wrote. “Given the strong public policy behind providing housing in both traditional and non-traditional forms, we do not believe that a narrow definition is warranted.” State auditors also found that Corona used as much as 52% of annual low/mod expenditures for administration and planning, that it spent $91,000 of low/mod monies over three years on community trash cleanup, and that the city failed to assist 25 families displaced by redevelopment activity. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has until January 18, 2005, to designate critical habitat for 20 species of salmon and steelhead trout listed under the Endangered Species Act, according to a consent decree signed in September. The decree settled a lawsuit environmentalists and commercial fishing companies filed against NMFS. The critical habitat designation could be the largest ever, as the federal agency will study about 150 watersheds in California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho. A critical habitat designation for the fish released in 2002 was withdrawn when development interests filed suit arguing that NMFS did not consider economic effects of the designation. The Sacramento Valley Conservancy completed its purchase of 4,060 acres of grasslands and oak woodlands in eastern Sacramento County. The land, in a lightly developed area more than 5 miles south of Highway 50, had been the site of the proposed 3,000-unit Deer Creek Hills subdivision, which voters rejected 2-to-1 three years ago (see , December 2000). The Conservancy pieced together about $11.1 million in state bond money from the county and two state agencies. Private contributions composed only about $250,000 of the $11.4 million purchase price.

Lennar Corp. has purchased the former El Toro Marine Corps base in Irvine. The Miami-based developer paid $649.5 million for 3,718 acres in an online auction that concluded February 16. The other bidders were Standard Pacific Homes and an unidentified “OCHOPE.” Typically, the military gives closed bases to local governments. But in this case, the Navy gave 1,000 acres to the Interior Department for a wildlife preserve and then put the rest up for auction in three chunks (see , May 2003). Los Angeles city officials tried to halt the auction at the last minute by resurrecting plans for an international airport at El Toro, but federal officials dismissed the pleas. Under Irvine's “Great Park” plan, Lennar must turn over about 1,500 acres to the city for parks, museums and other public amenities. On the rest of the acreage, Lennar may develop about 3,500 housing units, 3 million square feet of commercial, industrial and retail space and a university. Lennar also is obligated to fund about $400 million worth of infrastructure, some of which will be paid by future property owners. Lennar hopes to start building houses at El Toro by 2007. Meanwhile, the Navy is responsible for the ongoing, $300 million cleanup of hazardous materials, which is expected to take another eight years. A SLOW-GROWTH INITIATIVE in the City of Santee failed at a special election conducted February 15. The election appears to clear the way for development of the 2,600-acre Fanita Ranch, which has served as an informal park in the San Diego suburb for decades. Numerous plans for development of Fanita Ranch have come and gone over the years. In 1999, a year after voters rejected an initiative to limit development at Fanita Ranch, the city approved a 3,000-unit housing project for about half of the property. Later that year, however, voters rejected the project during a referendum (see , December 1999; , September 1999). At the same election, voters turned down a proposed parcel tax to fund acquisition of the real estate. The latest initiative would have prohibited Fanita Ranch development within 150 feet of any permanent or intermittent water course and on most slopes of more than 20% - essentially putting 90% of the ranch off-limits to development. Measure X also would have prevented lots smaller than one acre. For the undeveloped Rattlesnake Mountain area south of Fanita Ranch, the initiative would have prevented development on slopes greater than 25%. About 65% of voters said no to Measure X. Barratt American, which purchased Fanita Ranch a few years ago, and Greystone Homes, which has plans for Rattlesnake Mountain, poured approximately half a million dollars into the campaign. Barratt American has proposed a 1,380-house development on mostly half-acre lots, in addition to retail development. Greystone has proposed a 373-unit single-family home and condominium project for its property. A DECADES-OLD LAND USE CONTROVERSY in Malibu appears to have reached a permanent conclusion. In 1982, the Malibu Little League won the right to build baseball fields on 10-acres of the 93-acre, state-owned Bluffs Park. At that time, Malibu Little League needed a new place to play ball because the state wanted to restore wetlands at the site of the existing ball fields at Malibu Lagoon. Malibu's youngsters have continued to use the Bluffs Park fields even though a lease ended in 2002 and environmentalists have never been happy about the arrangement. The agreement, which appears to satisfy just about everyone, was approved in February. State parks will donate the 93-acre park to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, which will then sell 10 acres with the ball fields and other public amenities to the city for roughly $1.5 to $2.5 million. That money will go to state parks, which will put it toward the purchase of the 588-acre Soka University site in the Santa Monica Mountains, where Los Angeles County approved a huge, but never developed, campus during the 1990s (see , June 1996, March 1994, March 1993). State parks will also devote about $7 million set aside for the Little League field relocation to the Soka purchase. Coincidentally, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to allocate $550,000 toward the $35 million Soka site acquisition in February. THE MODESTO CITY COUNCIL has decided not to consider any sewer extensions to new growth areas for two years. The council decided to delay future sewer trunk extensions until the city completes new master plans for sewer, water and storm drain systems. Sewer extensions in Modesto must go to an advisory vote. With the council's decision, no such election may be conducted until 2007 unless developers foot the full cost of the election. City officials said they want a pause because they need more complete information. Recent Measure M elections have already opened about 1,600 acres to development. Even a representative of Centex Homes conceded to the that the City Council “probably did the right thing.” ORANGE COUNTY'S LONG-PROPOSED CenterLine light rail project may be dead. In February, the Orange County Transportation Authority voted to discuss other options for transit, including a possible rapid bus transit system and increased MetroLink train service. More than a decade ago, planners envisioned the CenterLine as a 28-mile-long system from Fullerton to Irvine. Over time, the proposed project shrank until it was down to only 9.3 miles from a multi-modal transportation center in downtown Santa Ana to John Wayne Airport, with a spur to Santa Ana College. The project is estimated to cost $1.1 billion, but $500 million the county has expected from the federal government appears to be in doubt. The agency is scheduled to revisit the matter in June. SIXTEEN INSURANCE COMPANIES led by Lloyd's of London have agreed to pay the State of California $93 million to settle insurance claims related to the state's highest priority Superfund site, the Stringfellow acid pits in Riverside County. Although cleanup of the toxic dump is expected eventually to cost the state more than $600 million, Attorney General Bill Lockyer said the settlements “will help California recoup some of its expenses and allow us to focus our attention on the remaining defendants.” A state lawsuit against 15 other insurance companies is scheduled for trial this month. From 1956 to 1972, manufacturing companies dumped 35 million gallons of solvents, pesticides and other toxic materials into unlined ponds at the 17-acre site just north of Highway 60 in Glen Avon. By the late 1970s, rain had caused the ponds to overflow at least once, and groundwater pollution was evident in nearby residential areas served by wells. The state began cleaning up the site during the 1980s. In 1998, a court found the state liable for the pollution because the state had not only regulated and inspected Stringfellow, but had directed companies to use the site. Since the early 1990s, the state has sought to collect on insurance policies it purchased over the years to cover its liability. CALVERAS AND TUOLOMNE COUNTIES have settled a lawsuit that Tuolumne had filed regarding Calaveras's approval of a 3,250-acre resort in the Copperopolis area. Tuolumne County officials argued that Oak Canyon Ranch - 2,275 houses and 1,200 visitor units, shopping areas and two golf courses - would impact a county road and two state highways in Tuolumne County (see January 2004). The two counties settled the lawsuit in February when Calaveras agreed to charge, and developer Maury Froman agreed to pay, $985 per unit toward traffic mitigation. Tuolumne County will get to spend the money, which would total $3.3 million if the project is fully built out. The project has been for sale recently. Froman also agreed to pay the two counties' legal expenses of about $130,000. Correction. The story in the December 2004 edition regarding a project at the Santa Clara County Fairgrounds contained an error. The story incorrectly stated that the subject of a 2000 environmental impact report was an outdoor amphitheater, and that the county Board of Supervisors later decided to pursue an indoor concert hall. The 1998 fairgrounds revitalization plan did call for an outdoor amphitheater, but the Board of Supervisors dropped the idea because of neighborhood opposition. Instead, the board in 1999 decided on an indoor facility, which was the subject of the EIR.

The big box wars continue unabated in California, with retail giant Wal-Mart losing one high-profile round but winning elsewhere. In early April, City of Inglewood voters rejected an initiative endorsed by Wal-Mart that would have required the city to approve, without environmental review, a 60-acre retail development between Hollywood Park race track and The Forum. A Wal-Mart supercenter was at the heart of the proposed shopping center. The election received attention nationwide because it was the first time that Wal-Mart had gone the initiative route for a proposed store. Despite a Wal-Mart campaign that cost more than $1 million, 61% of Inglewood voters rejected the initiative. The 4,575 votes that Wal-Mart received cost the company about $220 apiece. Labor unions led the fight against the Inglewood initiative, and Wal-Mart opponents nationwide took heart from the election. Still, Wal-Mart continued to press ahead. "It’s simply one store, one site in the list of hundreds we work on ever year," Wal-Mart Vice President Robert McAdam told the . "It’s not that big of a deal. We’re going to find ways to build stores and serve customers, and while we would have loved to have that location, there are going to be other opportunities." Elsewhere, in what might be only a procedural victory for Wal-Mart, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors repealed an ordinance adopted earlier this year that prohibited stores of more than 100,000 square feet from devoting 10% of floor space to nontaxable items (see CP&DR, January 2004). The measure was clearly aimed at blocking supercenters, which are typically more than 200,000 square feet with complete grocery stores inside. Groceries are not taxed in California. Wal-Mart sued Alameda County and the Central Valley City of Turlock, which adopted a similar ordinance. At the behest of County Counsel Richard Winnie, the Alameda board repealed the ordinance because the Planning Commission had never reviewed it — one of the grounds for Wal-Mart’s lawsuit. The company then dropped the its lawsuit, but the county intends to restart the ordinance adoption process. Across the bay in San Francisco, a Board of Supervisors committee approved a proposed ordinance that would permit stores larger than 120,000 square feet that sell groceries in downtown, but ban them elsewhere. The ordinance also would require all stores of at least 50,000 square feet to obtain a conditional use permit. Also in San Francisco, supervisors have approved a zoning ordinance that restricts "formula retail stores," defined as companies with at least 12 stores nationally and having at least two standardized traits, such as trademarks, merchandise, facades, signs or colors. The new ordinance outright bans formula retail stores on four blocks of Hayes Street in the center of Hayes Valley, near the Civic Center. The ordinance further requires formula retail stores that propose to open in one of the city’s approximately three dozen neighborhood retail districts to notify neighbors of the proposal. Supervisors said the law protects the city’s varied neighborhoods and local businesses. The Southern California Association of Governments has adopted a $213 billion, 25-year transportation plan. The plan calls for nearly across-the-board improvements and changes to the metropolitan region’s system: a magnetic levitation train system, expanding Metrolink and Metro Rapid bus lines, growth at regional airports, and more freeway lanes, including toll and carpool lanes. The plan also calls for increasing the state gas tax by 10 cents per gallon, and raising as much as $60 billion over 25 years from tolls and ridership fees. A lawsuit over the proposed Newhall Ranch project in Los Angeles County has been settled, marking what appears to be a change in tactics for opponents of the 21,000-home project just west of Santa Clarita. Three environmental organizations agreed to drop the lawsuit in exchange for Newhall Land & Farming Company’s willingness to provide Los Angeles County with annual groundwater usage reports, and to ensure that groundwater serving the development meets state health standards. Project opponents won an early round of the lawsuit when a Kern County Superior Court judge ruled, among other things, that there was inadequate evidence that water was available for the development. Newhall then acquired more water rights, and a revised environmental impact report was prepared. Last year, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved project and EIR revisions, which were enough to satisfy the Superior Court. Instead of pursuing an appeal of that decision, opponents apparently intend to fight individual subdivisions within Newhall Ranch and to continue to question the availability of water. The City of Santa Clarita’s proposal to annex 555 acres at the junction of Interstate 5 and Highway 14 — where a 5,800-home development is proposed — received a setback in April. A Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that the city must complete an environmental impact report before proceeding with the annexation. The city opposes the proposed Las Lomas development (see , January 2004) and has filed an application with the Los Angeles County Local County LAFCO. Las Lomas developers want the City of Los Angeles to annex the territory and have filed their proposal with that city. The San Diego Padres' new downtown ballpark opened in April. The opening of the stadium, which is within a short walk of both the San Diego Convention Center and the thriving Gaslamp Quarter, appears to have induced even more interest in commercial and multi-family housing constructing in downtown, as several projects have been proposed in recent months. The San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission has approved the proposed expansion of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by 140,000 acres after a bitter fight by the San Mateo County Farm Bureau and property owners. The LAFCO decision adds property on the San Mateo County coast and in the coastal hills, including many farms, to the open space district. The district, which covers portions of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, has been very aggressive about acquiring property and conservation easements. It has preserved 48,000 acres since 1972. Agency officials say they would like to preserve another 12,000 acres, including coastal lands, in the next 15 years. The Farm Bureau dropped its opposition after the district agreed not to use eminent domain in the coastal expansion area. In April, Gov. Schwarzenegger signed AB 1195 (Cohn), which ensures the district cannot use eminent domain in the expansion area. Still, some landowners are unhappy and are considering a ballot measure to overturn the LAFCO decision. Restoration of the Bolsa Chica wetlands in Huntington Beach took two major steps forward recently. In late March, the State Coastal Conservancy approved $10 million for the 1,200-acre project. In April, the State Lands Commission granted a four-year lease to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is scheduled to start work on restoration this fall. The ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are providing $90 million for the project to offset port expansion projects. Since the 1970s, environmentalists have fought development proposed on the degraded wetlands and adjacent bluffs (see , January 2002). Over the years, the building envelope has dwindled to about 60 acres, and the current developer, Hearthside Homes, is reportedly negotiating to sell that property so that it may be preserved. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has re-designated 4.1 million acres in 28 California counties as critical habitat for the California red-legged frog, which is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The designation is similar to a 2001 critical habitat designation that a federal judge threw out in November 2002 because the Fish and Wildlife Service did not prepare an adequate economic analysis (see , December 2002; , December 2000). The new designation excludes three military bases on the central coast because of a new law exempting military lands from the Endangered Species Act, and lands covered by habitat conservation plans in San Joaquin and Riverside counties. The new designation adds territory in Nevada and Calaveras counties. A revised economic analysis, however, was absent from the Fish and Wildlife Service’s announcement. The analysis will be released next year, the agency said. The building industry, which won the earlier suit, complained that the agency had not improved its practices this time around. The designation of critical habitat can force additional federal review of proposed developments.

The Bush administration announced it has dropped a plan to relax federal regulation of wetlands. For most of 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers worked on a proposal to redefine which streams, ponds, wetlands and other seasonal and permanent bodies of water would be protected under the Clean Water Act. The proposal was a response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2001 ruling in , 121 S. Ct. 675 (see , February 2001), in which the court limited the Army Corps’s ability to regulate isolated bodies of water. However, most states, including California, half the members of the House of Representatives and numerous angling, hunting and conservation groups opposed the proposal to relax federal regulations. Homebuilders, on the other hand, endorsed the concept. In announcing that the administration was dropping the proposal, EPA Administrator Michael Leavitt endorsed the longstanding policy of "no net loss" of wetlands. However, Leavitt also suggested that fear of extensive litigation drove the decision. IN THE LATEST INSTALLMENT of a controversy that is nearly a century old, Attorney General Bill Lockyer has sued the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) for failing to restore the Lower Owens River. The lawsuit, which the Sierra Club and the Owens Valley Committee joined, appears to have spurred the DWP to action. Under a 1997 memorandum of understanding that settled earlier litigation, DWP agreed to put a prescribed amount of water in the dry riverbed by June 2003. The project was intended to serve as mitigation for DWP’s increased groundwater pumping in Inyo County that commenced when DWP completed a second aqueduct in 1970. "DWP has now missed all the deadlines that the MOU parties negotiated after years of litigation and settlement discussions," asserts the lawsuit, filed during December in Inyo County Superior Court. "DWP is now proceeding on an ad hoc basis, without any specific enforceable deadlines, and it continues to further delay the project and miss its own work schedules. … t is unclear when, if ever, the city and DWP will complete this important mitigation project, cure its ongoing violation of CEQA, and bring the project’s environmental benefits to fruition." Lockyer and the environmental groups asked the court to limit DWP’s groundwater pumping until the Lower Owens River project is completed. Two weeks after the lawsuit was filed, DWP announced it would restore a steady flow of water to the Lower Owens River within two years. The agency said it hoped its new commitment would settle the lawsuit. The DWP’s acquisition of water rights from the Owens Valley during the early 20th century made possible much of Los Angeles’s growth. But the large-scale water diversion dried up Owens Lake and made the Owens Valley, literally, a dust bowl. SACRAMENTO FLOOD PROTECTION advanced significantly at the end of 2003 when Congress approved a deal that authorizes about $220 million for a 7-foot raise of Folsom Dam and downstream levy improvements. Once complete, the improvements would give Sacramento — which now is not safe from 100-year storms — only a 1-in-213 chance of flooding in any given year, according to engineers. Major flood improvements for Sacramento, which is threatened chiefly by the American River, have stalled for years because Reps. John Doolittle (R-Rocklin) and Robert Matsui (D-Sacramento) could not agree. Doolittle has long championed building the proposed Auburn Dam, which could provide flood control and drinking water, while Matsui sought cheaper and less environmentally damaging flood control projects downstream (see , September 2002). The deal approved as part of a federal budget bill authorizes the dam and levy upgrades, which will be partly funded by the state and local taxpayers. The deal also authorizes $135 million worth of unspecified water projects in Doolittle’s district. An additional $66 million will fund a new bridge below Folsom Dam. The road across the dam has been closed because of security concerns, creating a huge traffic problem. THE LONG-RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN for the University of California, Davis, has been approved by the UC Board of Regents. The controversial plan calls for: • 1,600 housing units in a new neighborhood west of the campus • More than 2 million square feet of academic and administrative buildings • Research parks of 27 acres and 11 acres apiece • An 18,000-seat football stadium to be funded by private contributions and student-approved fees • A 170,000-square-foot Robert Mondavi Institute for Wine and Food Science to be funded partly by Mondavi, Anheuser-Busch Foundation and other private groups • A 75,000-square-foot conference center with an adjoining 75-room hotel. UC Davis planners have been working on the plan for years and halved the size of both the new neighborhood and the hotel because of community concerns. Still, litigation by Davis residents is likely. The long-range development plan and related documents are available at: www.ormp.ucdavis.edu/environreview/lrdp.html SOME OF THE STATE'S nine regional water quality control boards fail to follow through on regulatory enforcement actions, according to a report the State Auditor issued in December. For example, the Santa Ana and San Francisco Bay regional boards often let polluters, which may be either public or private entities, fund "supplemental environmental projects" instead of pay fines. But those boards did not ensure the projects were actually completed. When the San Francisco Bay board did levy fines, it would suspend the fines if the polluters agreed to clean up contamination or stop violations. "However, the San Francisco Bay regional board did not always follow up to determine that polluters either came into compliance with the State water quality act in according with the suspension agreements or paid the ," the State Auditor reported. The auditor recommended that the State Water Resources Control Board require the regional boards to monitor and report on the supplemental cleanup projects, and collect all fines promptly. The California Environmental Protection Agency, the agency that includes the state board, said it would attempt to implement the recommendations. The State Auditor’s report is available at www.bsa.ca.gov/bsa SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERVISOR Jerry Eaves is scheduled this month to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery for failing to disclose the receipt of gifts. Federal and state prosecutors announced the plea deal in December, shortly before Eaves was to stand trial on five federal counts of mail fraud and one charge of conspiracy. Eaves’s guilty plea to one state count of bribery apparently will conclude both the state and federal prosecutions. Authorities allege that Eaves accepted $33,000 in campaign contributions and $6,000 worth of lodging and hospitality at a Las Vegas hotel from William "Shep" McCook in exchange for Eaves’s votes allowing McCook to erect, and later sell, billboards on county-owned land near Interstates 10 and 215 in Colton. Under the plea deal, Eaves will pay a $10,000 fine and serve three years of "informal" probation. He also must resign from the Board of Supervisors. A former San Bernardino County administrative officer, two Colton city councilmen and McCook’s partner had earlier pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges related to the billboard scheme. McCook continues to await trial. A former Assemblyman and Rialto city councilman who was already barred from seeking a fourth term on the Board of Supervisors because of earlier campaign finance violations, Eaves continued to maintain he was guilty of nothing more than poor record-keeping. "I still feel I’m innocent," he told the . "I had to take what was offered. I wanted to get rid of these charges." THE PROCESS OF SPLITTING Santa Barbara County into two counties will move forward. County Clerk-Recorder-Assessor Joe Holland announced in December that Santa Maria-area proponents of the county split submitted enough signatures on a petition to qualify the matter for the ballot (see , July 2003). The next step is for Gov. Schwarzenegger to appoint a five-member commission to study the proposed secession. The issue is not likely to make the ballot until 2006. THE CITY OF STOCKTON'S $600 million venture to privatize the city’s water system has been thrown out by San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Bob McNatt because the city did not complete an environmental study of the project. McNatt ruled that the contract should be voided until the city completes an environmental review under CEQA. A partnership of Thames Water, of England, and Colorado-based OMI, Inc., took over the city’s water system last year. City officials contended the 20-year contract would save the city $175 million. But the Sierra Club, the League of Women Voters and the Concerned Citizens Coalition of Stockton filed a lawsuit. One month after the deal was signed last year, Stockton voters approved an initiative requiring voters to decide on any utility privatization worth more than $5 million. But the initiative was too late to block the OMI-Thames deal. THE CENTER FOR COLLABORATIVE POLICY at California State University, Sacramento, has started an Internet-based newsletter that addresses methods for resolving sticky land use issues. The Collaborative Edge can be found at www.csus.edu/ccp

Three local government organizations and three conservation groups have asked Gov. Schwarzenegger to work with them and other stakeholders on developing a comprehensive statewide growth strategy. The September 1 request came from the California State Association of Counties, California Special Districts Association, California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions, American Farmland Trust, Endangered Habitats League and Sierra Club. “As you and those within your administration have acknowledged, the current situation — in which housing prices are increasingly out of reach for the average family, inefficient land use patterns are gobbling up farmland and habitat, traffic congestion and air pollution are worsening, cities, counties and special districts cannot afford public services and infrastructure improvements, and the disadvantaged cannot find places to live near job opportunities — simply cannot continue,” the letter states. Not coincidentally, the CSAC coalition is composed of interest groups that have not been directly involved in the talks between the League of California Cities and the California Building Industry Association regarding housing development. The coalition made five recommendations to the governor: • Implement AB 857, a 2002 law that requires the state to make planning and capital spending decisions that encourage infill development, protect environmental and agricultural resources, and encourage efficient development patterns. • Work with the Legislature, and regional and state governments on budget and tax reforms “to break the barriers standing in the way of smarter growth patterns.” • “Establish a bipartisan working group to develop specific legislative, budget and policy changes to achieve efficient growth and prosperity outcomes.” • “Support additional funding for planning, infrastructure, housing, public services, and agricultural and habitat land conservation.” • Establish pilot projects to build housing, improve transportation choices and “encourage cooperation between communities and developers.” The same coalition, with the addition of the California Farm Bureau Federation, also sent a letter to Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman asking for full implementation of AB 857. “The state has not really made any effort to implement that legislation,” CSAC lobbyist DeAnn Baker said. The coalition wants to create a single effort to address land use and related fiscal issues, Baker explained. There have been so many scattered efforts and proposals recently that it has been difficult simply to track all of the discussions, she said. As of late September, the CSAC coalition had not received a response.

Construction of a sewage plant in the unincorporated San Luis Obispo County community of Los Osos has been halted following the successful recall of three elected officials who supported the plant. During a September 27 special election, voters in the Los Osos Community Services District (CSD) recalled Directors Stan Gustafson, Gordon Hensley and Richard LeGros, and replaced them with Chuck Cesena, John Fouche and Steve Senet. The ousted directors had approved a large sewer plant that is — rather, was — under construction in the center of town. The new directors and two directors who were not recalled oppose the project. Voters also approved a ballot measure blocking the project. The reconstituted CSD board halted construction and dismissed the agency’s general manager, attorney and public information officer. Board members have indicated they would pursue a different type of treatment plant to be built outside of town. Indirectly, the board has picked a fight with state agencies that have been working for years on water quality improvements State regulators have insisted since the 1970s that Los Osos needs a wastewater treatment facility. The town of 14,000 people relies on 6,000 individual septic systems, which regulators blame for polluting the groundwater and Morro Bay estuary. A state-imposed building moratorium has been in place since 1988. After years of debate and planning, the state Coastal Commission approved a development permit for the treatment plant in 2004. Construction on the $150 million collection system and treatment plant began earlier this year. The Water Resources Control Board provided a $135 million low-interest loan for the work. Since the new CSD board changed directions, the water board has demanded repayment of $6.5 million, and is withholding another $6.4 million, arguing that the district broke an agreement when it stopped construction. The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board is pursuing $10,000-per-day fines that it has held in abeyance for years. After several tense weeks, Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee (R-San Luis Obispo) began mediating negotiations between CSD representatives and state officials in late October. In what might be the most expensive hotel deal in history, the Los Angeles City Council has agreed to provide up to $290 million in subsidies for a 1,100-room Hilton Hotel next to the downtown convention center. Under the deal approved September 30, the city will rebate a minimum of $246 million in transient occupancy taxes (TOT) that the hotel would generate over 25 years. If the hotel generates more than that amount in TOT, the city and hotel would evenly split the next $48 million. Additionally, the city will rebate $4 million worth of building permit fees and the L.A. Community Redevelopment Agency will provide a low-cost, $16 million loan. The hotel is part of a larger entertainment and residential project being pursued just north of the convention center and Staples Center by developer Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG). Development began in September on parts of the project, which is planned to contain a 7,000-seat performing arts center, a 14-screen movie theater, numerous restaurants and nightclubs, offices, broadcast facilities, condominiums and, of course, a 55-story Hilton. AEG reportedly is selling the hotel site at a discount to developers Wolff Urban Management and Apollo Real Estate Advisors. The city-owned convention center has been a money pit forever, draining as much as $20 million annually from the city’s general fund. Council members said the hotel would revitalize both the convention center and downtown. Operators of existing downtown hotels lobbied against the Hilton’s subsidy and have vowed to block the deal in court or via a ballot measure. An Oregon judge has thrown out a property rights initiative approved last year by state voters. In a decision that is definitely not the final word on the matter, Marion County Circuit Judge Mary James ruled that Measure 37 violated the federal and State of Oregon constitutions, and impermissibly prohibited the Legislature from exercising its police powers. More than 60% of Oregon voters backed the initiative, which requires compensation to property owners for regulations adopted after the owner acquires property. Judge James ruled that the initiative treated property owners differently based upon when they acquired their property, which violated equal protection rights and the state constitution. She also ruled the initiative violated the separation of powers doctrine and intruded on legislative authority. A similar property rights initiative that Oregon voters approved in 2000 also was struck down in state court, but on the mostly technical ground that the initiative covered too many subjects. James’s ruling went to the merits of the measure. Property rights advocates with the group Oregonians in Action said they would continue to press on in court, and would pursue another initiative if necessary. The case is , Risk Management Division, Marion County Circuit Court No. 05C10444. State Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Lucetta Dunn has resigned after little more than a year on the job. Dunn, an attorney who has worked in the Orange County development industry for many years, resigned effective October 31 to become president and chief executive officer of the Orange County Business Council. There was no immediate word on a replacement at HCD. Litigation over the siting of the Transbay Terminal in San Francisco has apparently been settled with the San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ decision in October to pay developer Jack Myers $58 million. The Transbay Joint Powers Authority acquired Myers’s property on Natoma Street via eminent domain after Myers had begun work on a 432-unit condominium project. The government valued the property at $32 million, a price Myers rejected. The city’s transportation authority and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission will fund the $58 million purchase. The $2 billion Transbay Terminal is planned to provide a central station for numerous forms of public transit near San Francisco’s Financial District (see , August 2004). A controversial Marin County quarry will be the subject of a $1 million environmental impact report. In October, the Board of Supervisors awarded the EIR — worth up to $998,840 — for the San Rafael Rock Quarry project to ESA. The quarry has been in operation for more than 100 years, but it has became a source of neighborhood and county complaints and litigation during recent years (see , April 2004). The environmental study, to be funded by quarry owner the Dutra Group, will examine a new reclamation plan for the 276-acre property. NASA Ames Research Center near Mountain View and internet powerhouse Google have announced an agreement under which Google would develop a 1-million-square-foot research facility on the federal installation. The project would permit public and private scientists and engineers to collaborate in a number of areas, including biotechnology and nanotechnology. As many as 4,000 people could work at the facility. Under the agreement, Google is responsible for all development costs, including infrastructure construction. Residents of a 495-acre island of unincorporated Orange County have blocked the City of Anaheim’s annexation bid. A group called West Islands Neighbors submitted 1,944 signatures — a little more than 50% of registered voters — on petitions against the annexation. That was enough to kill the annexation without an election, a rare occurrence under current law. City and county officials said annexation of the La Colonia, Sherwood Forest and Thistle neighborhoods made sense because the city could provide better public services. Opponents said they doubted service levels would increase and said they feared the city would crack down on code violations, such as the keeping of livestock and vehicle storage.

A large residential and commercial development in Upland is back on track after an appellate court lifted an order that halted some grading. Although litigation filed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District against developers of the Colonies Crossroads continues, construction is proceeding. The two sides are in a dispute regarding the cost and design of 65 acres worth of flood control facilities on the property along the 210 freeway in far western San Bernardino County (see , December 2003). After losing in Superior Court, the county appealed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which blocked further grading for new flood control facilities. But in late December, the court ruled that halting the flood control work threatened public safety, and the court lifted the injunction. Construction resumed full speed shortly thereafter, and, in January, the City of Upland approved a final map and amended development agreement for the 440-acre, 1,150-unit project. Although the county and the developers have fought vigorously in court and in the press, Scott Sommer, an attorney for The Colonies Partners, said the dispute could be resolved. "There are some serious settlement discussions getting started," Sommer said. DEVELOPERS OF A "NEW TOWN" development in the San Joaquin County city of Lathrop have settled a lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club by agreeing to fund a new agricultural land trust. The River Islands project calls for 11,000 housing units and a 325-acre employment center on 4,800 acres just west of Interstate 5 (see , March 2003). The Sierra Club — which also sued over earlier proposals for a theme park on the site — filed a lawsuit in early 2003 regarding the River Islands environmental impact report. Under the settlement, Cambay Group will pay the Modesto-based Great Valley Center $200,000 to establish a new trust to preserve farmland in the project’s vicinity. Cambay Group must also pay $2,200 per acre (the amount will be adjusted for inflation) for every acre it develops, including about $900,000 up front. The developer could eventually pay more than $8 million into the trust fund. River Islands still needs some state and federal wetlands, flood control and endangered species permits. Construction remains at least one year away. DURING A SEVEN-HOUR HEARING attended by about 400 people, the Coastal Commission approved a housing and commercial development proposed for the Dana Point Headlands in Orange County. The commission voted 7-5 for developer Sanford Edward’s proposal for 122 houses, a 90-room hotel and 40,000 square feet of commercial development on the promontory. Controversy over development of the property has been around for about 15 years. In 1994, the city approved 370 houses and a 400-room hotel, but voters overturned that decision with two referenda (see , February 1997; , December 1994). Among the issues for the latest proposal were habitat for the endangered Pacific pocket mouse and the threatened California gnatcatcher, and the need to move and rebuild a seawall. Environmentalists led by the Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club opposed the project and threatened litigation after the Commission voted. The Commission majority contended the proposal was a balanced plan that would protect and enhance open space on half of the 121-acre site. Commissioner Mary Nichols, who was state Resources Agency secretary under Gov. Gray Davis, said that habitat and species would be better off with the project than without it. MARYSVILLE MAYOR DICK HELDER resigned in January while under pressure from Yuba County District Attorney Pat McGrath. Six months earlier, a Yuba County grand jury accused Helder of 20 counts of misconduct for acquiring interests in property within Marysville’s redevelopment project area and failing to disclose that interest. McGrath alleged that the mayor hid his interest by using a "straw buyer." After Helder resigned, a Yuba County judge dismissed the grand jury’s accusation because loss of office was the only potential penalty. COMPETING STREAM PROTECTIONS MEASURES on the Napa County ballot in March appear be dividing residents and interest groups into three camps. Major winemaking groups and most county supervisors support Measure P, which would establish setbacks of 25 to 150 feet between farms and streams depending upon the terrain and waterway (see , May 2003). Property rights activists call Measure P a "land grab" that could prohibit farming and logging on 53,000 acres. Environmentalists say Measure P does not go far enough, and they have thrown their weight behind Measure O, which calls for setbacks as large as 325 feet. Environmentalists say the restrictions are necessary to prevent further conversion of hillside forests to vineyards that are susceptible to erosion. CORRECTION. A story in the January edition on the proposed Las Lomas development near Santa Clarita mischaracterized the seismic issues. According to state maps, no fault runs directly through the site. However, territory that qualifies as special study areas under the Alquist-Priolo Act virtually surrounds the Las Lomas site.

A rule proposed March 25 by the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers could broaden the definition of "waters of the United States" subject to Clean Water Act regulation. Among much else, that could expand the areas where developers need Section 404 permits from the Corps to go forward, in a parallel permitting process in addition to local government. The Association of California Water Agencies says the rule apparently would place "most intermittent and ephemeral streams as well as wetlands located near rivers and streams" under Clean Water Act protection. (See http://www.acwa.com/news/water-news/proposed-rule-clarifies-clean-water-act-protections.) The firm of Alston & Bird LLP has posted its analysis at http://bit.ly/Pdlybx. As of April 1 the proposed rule had not yet been posted for comment purposes on the Federal Register site nor Regulations.gov, but a preview of the document is available at http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/wus_proposed_rule_20140325_prepublication.pdf. Tax legislation could end the Jurupa Valley trap The League of California Cities is backing two bills, SB 69 (See http://http://legiscan.com/CA/bill/SB69/2013) and AB 1521 (http://legiscan.com/CA/bill/AB1521/2013), to undo the sudden funding disadvantage that pushed the newly incorporated city of Jurupa Valley toward disincorporation this winter. The bills are based on the prior SB 56 and are designed to restore funding to newly incorporated towns from vehicle license fees As CP&DR reported in January (see http://www.cp-dr.com/articles/node-3427), the legislature first sent vehicle license fee (VLF) money to help new towns like Jurupa Valley with their new municipal governments, then took much of it away with SB 89. The two new bills propose to restore incentives for new cities to form and for existing cities to annex territory, which the League writes has been absent since a state budget maneuver, the VLF-property tax swap of 2004, left cities unable to count directly on substantial VLF revenues. The new bills would change property tax and/or VLF distribution formulas to favor recently incorporated or annexed areas. See http://www.cacities.org/Top/News/News-Articles/2014/March/Legislation-Proposes-New-City-Incorporation,-Annex. The Central Valley is sinking from groundwater loss. National Geographic and California newspapers reported this week on news from USGS that ground levels have sunk, in places alarmingly, near the Delta-Mendota Canal in the San Joaquin Valley. The USGS announcement is at http://bit.ly/1htGt4e. National Geographic has an extensive writeup at http://bit.ly/1dKrNcg quoting one researcher for the news that "one 2-square-mile... area... is subsiding almost a foot.. annually." Further recent reports on groundwater as a crisis in the San Joaquin Valley appear in the San Jose Mercury News at http://bit.ly/O7KD6l and the Hanford Sentinel at http://bit.ly/1mGeGkR. Online hotel-booking services held not to owe San Diego hotel tax The Second District Court of Appeal ruled twice in March that "online travel companies" (OTCs) such as Priceline, Expedia and Travelocity do not owe San Diego's transient occupancy tax on fees they collect for serving as middlemen between hotels and guests. The decision focused on tax amounts that cities may lose through cases when the OTC pays wholesale room rates to hotels, charges retail rates to guests, and keeps the difference. The court referred to the text of the San Diego tax ordinance, and compared prior rulings in the same group of coordinated cases for Anaheim and Santa Monica, to find tax was only due on room rent charged by the business that provides the lodging. Hence, the court found, tax is only due to the city on the wholesale rate that the hotel operator is paid, even if the hotel guest might have spent more. It added in a footnote that the 1912 case of Los Angeles Gas & Electric Corp. v. City of Los Angeles , 163 Cal. 621, "does not support a ruling that hotels may delegate to OTCs all of their responsibilities under the ordinance, nor does it suggest that the OTCs may be audited or held liable for nonpayment of any under the circumstances before us." The matter was originally heard in Los Angeles Superior Court. On appeal, a three-judge panel of the Second District issued a unanimous initial opinion March 5 that it did not order formally published (at http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/B243800.PDF). The panel then agreed to revisit the matter, but after rehearing issued a nearly identical opinion March 27 (at http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B243800A.PDF). Airbnb to pay hotel taxes in San Francisco and Portland Under pressures from city officials that included partway-drafted regulatory legislation, Airbnb announced March 31 that it would collect and pay San Francisco's 14 percent hotel tax on behalf of hosts in the city who list housing through the Airbnb service. Carolyn Said of the San Francisco Chronicle explains details at http://bit.ly/1mGqOlH. She further writes that the company made a similar announcement in Portland, Oregon last week and has offered $21 million in tax payments in New York. The San Francisco announcement followed the San Diego hotel tax decision by four days but it was not mentioned in the Airbnb weblog post announcing the decision (at http://publicpolicy.airbnb.com/san-francisco-taxes-airbnb-community/). Storm water Industrial General Permit up for final adoption April 1 The State Water Resources Control Board meets April 1 to consider adoption of the updated statewide Industrial General Permit for "storm water discharges associated with industrial activity". The General Permit covers entities in California including oil, gas and mining facilities, landfills, recyclers, feedlots, factories and food processors, airports, certain vehicle maintenance shops, and sewer systems. If granted, the approval would update a prior document, long since expired, that has been in effect by default since 1997. The new proposed permit would apply National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards under the Clean Water Act. It would require specified levels of effort, depending on circumstances and type of pollutant, to keep runoff within limits based variously on the contents of the effluent and the carrying capacities of the bodies of water receiving the runoff. Unlike the prior 1997 General Permit, it would require minimum Best Management Practices statewide along with other new standards. On March 28, the Friday before its Tuesday approval meeting, the board released responses to commenters that reflected some tension over the scope and timing of the third and last comment opportunity on the draft Permit: comment had been allowed only from February 19 to March 4, and only on the latest round of revisions. Several more substantive comments questioned the new definitions of Best Management Practices and of Numeric Action Levels (NALs), which are thresholds for pollution conditions including pH, suspended solids, oil and grease, and individual chemicals and metals. NAL exceedances trigger stricter levels of regulation and requirements to present plans for improvement. A unique comment from the Mosquito and Vector Control Association of California prompted the board to warn dischargers that local mosquito control ordinances would apply to stormwater facilities where water might be left standing. The meeting notice, comments, staff response chart, and other relevant documents are at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/industrial.shtml.

Monterey County voters in June may decide as many as three ballot measures regarding the county general plan. The Board of Supervisors approved a new general plan on January 3. At the same time, the board agreed to ask voters whether they want to keep the new plan. The board also consented to placing on the ballot a general plan initiative backed by environmental and homeowner organizations. The county had originally refused to put the initiative on the ballot (see f, October 2006; , May 2006). Meanwhile, backers of the initiative have gathered signatures to force a referendum on the new general plan. They said a referendum is necessary to prevent the new plan from taking effect prior to the June election so that there is not a window for developers to take advantage of the new plan. The plan opponents also said the referendum would present voters with a more straightforward question than the Board of Supervisors had crafted. The county adopted the updated general plan after seven years of planning and three discarded drafts (see , July 2004). The new plan designates a number of growth areas, mostly near cities and existing unincorporated communities. Supporters say the plan will help the county accommodate needed housing. Opponents say the plan sacrifices important farmland and encourages sprawl. The newly adopted plan is available at www.co.monterey.ca.us/pbi/gpu . A controversial Carmel Valley subdivision is back in court six years after a state appellate court rejected an earlier environmental impact report for the project. The Monterey County Board of Supervisors approved the September Ranch project in December. The project calls for 73 market-rate houses, 15 inclusionary units and seven units of workforce housing on about 100 acres. The remainder of the nearly 900-acre site will remain as an equestrian center and open space. In 2001, the Sixth District Court of Appeal used the September Ranch project to make an important ruling regarding baseline conditions for environmental studies. The issue concerned how much water had historically been used for farming on the site, and, therefore, how much water would be available for what was then a 109-unit project. The amount of agricultural water use increased during the 3 1/2 years the development application was under consideration, and the final EIR relied on the higher volume of water used during the end of the process. The court ruled in , 87 Cal.App. 4th 99, that “baseline conditions are normally to be determined at the time environmental review is begun” (see , April 2001). The EIR for the newly approved project says that water for September Ranch is available from a recently discovered aquifer that is separate from the overburdened Carmel Valley aquifer. Project opponents submitted information disputing the analysis, but the county concluded that disagreement among experts was not enough to force changes in the EIR. In January, three environmental groups filed two separate lawsuits challenging the EIR’s water analysis. Impacts to traffic, historic sites and the Monterey pine forest are also issues. The flood-control situation in Sacramento continues to evolve rapidly as local, state and federal officials grapple with the city’s inadequate protection from high water. The Federal Emergency Management Agency revealed in January that it would require all property owners in Sacramento’s Natomas Basin with federally backed loans to purchase flood insurance before the end of the year. The mandate will remain in place until Natomas, the City of Sacramento’s primary growth area, has at least 100-year flood protection. Also in January, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency began detailing proposed assessment district changes that would expand the district’s territory and raise existing assessments. Property owners are scheduled to vote on the assessments by mail in March. The revised assessment district would encompass all of Natomas, including undeveloped portions in Sacramento and Sutter counties, where property owners would pay $76 annually. The Flood Control Agency plan is intended to raise $326 million over 30 years to help Natomas achieve 100-year flood protection by 2010, and for the entire area to get 200-year flood protection in following years. The money would match more than $2 billion that local officials hope to receive from the federal and state governments. These moves follow a state Department of Water Resources request to Sacramento last fall for a growth moratorium in Natomas, a request the city has rebuffed. The state’s request was spurred by a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ announcement that Natomas lacked 100-year flood protection because seepage is weakening levees. A San Francisco Superior Court Judge has issued a ruling that builds on a 2004 appellate court decision aiding redevelopment agencies in cleaning up brownfields. Judge John Munter ruled that five manufacturers or distributors of dry cleaning chemicals and one dry cleaner are liable for the future costs of cleaning up contamination from the Modesto Steam Laundry & Cleaning operation. In 2004, the First District Court of Appeal ruled that companies that made or distributed solvents may be held liable for cleanup under the Polanco Act and returned the case to Superior Court (see , August 2004). The City of Modesto and its redevelopment agency contend that dry cleaners disposed of solvent waste by dumping it into the sewer system, from which contaminants leached into soil and groundwater. Last year, a San Francisco jury held the five manufacturers and distributors liable for $3.2 million for harming the city’s drinking water, and Munter assessed punitive damages of $13 million. The latest ruling assesses liability for future costs and also awards the Modesto Redevelopment Agency $430,000 for work already done at a brownfield site. “It’s good news for cities who are seeking to clean up contamination in redevelopment areas because it enlarges the pool of potentially responsible parties,” agency attorney Michael Axline, of Miller, Axline & Sawyer, told the . An appeal of Judge Munter’s ruling is likely. The cases are , No. 9993345, and , No. 999643. The Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and the California Environmental Protection Agency have released the “Goods Movement Action Plan,” which is intended to guide allocation of $3.1 billion contained in the $19.9 billion Proposition 1B that voters approved last November. State and regional officials have been working on the plan for two years to address transportation and environmental problems caused by ever-increasing traffic at shipping ports, especially the port at Los Angeles and Long Beach (see , June 2006). The plan does not necessarily dictate how the money should be spent, rather it provides about 200 “candidate actions” to improve infrastructure, protect public and environmental health, upgrade security and lessen community impacts. The California Transportation Commission, the Air Resources Board and the California Maritime Transportation Security Council will make the ultimate spending decisions. The Goods Movement Action Plan is available at www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/gmp.htm . The issue of historic preservation will apparently return to the City of Berkeley ballot, as opponents of a revised landmarks preservation ordinance have submitted petitions to force a referendum. The city eased its preservation regulations in December, one month after voters rejected a measure that would have locked in existing regulations that were some of the most stringent in the state. But preservation advocates said the revisions favored developers and now want voters to decide again. Unless the city calls a special election, the referendum will appear on the ballot in 2008. An organization representing mobile home and travel trailer owners on the shores of Lake Berryessa have sued the Bureau of Reclamation over a plan adopted last year that calls for the mobile homes and trailers to be removed. The federal court lawsuit filed by the group Berryessa For All contends that the bureau’s decision was arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion. The agency adopted the plan in June 2006 with the goal of boosting short-term visitor use at the reservoir in the hills of eastern Napa County. The plan calls for removing more than 1,000 trailers located in seven “resorts” whose leases expire between this year and 2009. The government hopes to lure new concessionaires to develop facilities that may include cabins, motels and campgrounds (see , October 2006). Owners of mobile homes and travel trailers contend they were not given a fair shake during the plan preparation process, which lasted for six years.

The Capitol Area Development Agency (CADA) was seemingly exempt from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies last year. However, in the face of state budget cuts, officials plan to cease the agency's development operations and sell off its properties to subsidize the state budget. CADA still hopes to retain its role in supporting development and managing affordable housing projects.  Enviros Rally at Capitol to Save CEQA Sacramento Bee Labor unions, tribal organizations, and a coalition of environmental groups gathered on Tuesday to protest against the state's prospect to reform CEQA. Protesters claim that any attack on the law is also an attack on the state's workers, families and communities. In addition, the pro-CEQA coalition has released a report that highlights how the law benefits the state to counter common claims that the law is used to prevent development projects that are good for the environment and the state's economy. Oakley Pushes Through Redevelopment Project Contra Costa Times Oakley city officials have approved the original development plan for the former CentroMart building downtown. The building was purchased with redevelopment funds last May after Oakley's redevelopment agency had been dissolved, meaning the state had to authorize its transaction. Council's vote last Tuesday upheld the project's inclusion of a discount variety store and grocery store debunking rumors of relocating the community's library to the CentroMart site.  St ate Orders San Bernardino to Pay Over $500 Million in Mishandled Redevelopment Funds Modesto Bee The state's Controller, John Chiang, identified that San Bernardino mishandled its redevelopment funds by illegally transferring funds to its EDC and wrongly holding onto the remaining $420.5 million. The (now) former City Manager claims that the report's finding are false, and although the city later admitted its transfer of funds to the EDC, it claimed the transaction was legal. The state is requiring the bankrupt city to repay these funds, leaving the city at a loss for how it will be able to transfer money it does not have-possibly resulting in criminal charges for the city.    LA Council Approves Downtown Streetcar Plan LA Downtown News The Los Angeles City Council approved a 30-year operational plan that will commit $294 million for LA's downtown streetcar. The maintenance funds for the streetcar will come from fares, ad revenue and the county's Measure R sales tax- after the streetcar is built. To finance the construction, the city will be using a voter approved special tax and (hopefully) federal funds. The project's draft EIR is expected for release this summer and construction could begin as early as 2014.   Could SF Become the Next Big Cruise City? Mercury News San Francisco's new James R. Herman Cruise Terminal could be just what the city needs to get the cruise industry's attention and attract new megaships to city's port. America Cup, who currently occupies the new terminal space, has pledged over $100 million to the city for port and harbor improvements and will illuminate the terminal with a series of ship races beginning this summer. The grand plans for the terminal's interior will be completed in early 2014.

Assembly Majority Leader Toni Atkins has gotten to Governor Brown's desk with a new version of a bill to smooth recurring problems in the dissolution of local redevelopment agencies. A statement from Atkins' office  said the bill is similar to last year's AB 662 but drops a provision on amendments to project contracts that led Brown to veto it. The revised bill contains continuity provisions that would allow projects begun under redevelopment agencies to be carried forward. They include infrastructure financing districts, reimbursement of expenses taken on by housing authorities, and authorization to use bond proceeds on already-approved projects.  Proponents qualify Los Gatos ballot measure to authorize new Netflix HQ Los Gatos will vote June 3 on the "Albright Way Initiative" to allow construction of a new headquarters for Netflix. Developer John Shenk received town council approval to exceed 35-foot height limits on the project, which calls for four office buildings and a parking garage, but the project has been blocked by litigation. The ballot measure would confirm the prior approval but it was disputed whether the lengthy proposal might also add permissions beyond what the council granted. Critics said it would allow the town's community development director to be the only approving authority for any subsequent changes to the project. The San Jose Mercury News has coverage here . A city staff report and many public comment letters appear in the town council's February 3 agenda packet . The staff report said the DA reviewed complaints about allegedly misleading claims by petition gatherers, including that Netflix might leave the area or that there would be "no money for schools," and concluded such statements could not be proven false, hence did not amount to violations of law. The town's page on the initiative is here .  San Francisco to vote on requiring waterfront height variances by referendum Emboldened by their "No Wall on the Waterfront" win last November, San Francisco neighborhood and open-space activists have qualified a new ballot measure to require a citywide vote on any proposal for a waterfront project to exceed currently zoned height limits. The measure presumably will go to a vote June 3, 2014. (Ballotpedia has more here . The proponents' site  provides the measure's text.)  The lawsuit met almost immediately with a lawsuit from and other opponents, who claim that the waterfront is the state's turf, not the city's.  The proposal ties into raging citywide debates on whether residential high-rise construction will reduce housing costs by expanding supply or raise them by skewing the housing stock toward luxury, and on whether large-scale construction serves or marginalizes existing neighbors and public spaces. Projects at issue include a proposal to bring the Golden State Warriors basketball team to a new waterfront arena and a large planned redevelopment of post-industrial Pier 70 in the Dogpatch neighborhood. November's "wall on the waterfront" measure defeated the 8 Washington residential development with backing from many tenant activist groups although, as proposed, the project would have contributed $11 million in mitigation fees toward affordable housing. More coverage of the 8 Washington debate is  here . On the new ballot measure, SF Weekly 's Joe Eskenazi has a news analysis with emphasis on the role of former mayor Art Agnos in organizing, especially against the Warriors proposal. San Clemente has a General Plan San Clemente adopted a General Plan on February 4. The adoption included a zoning change to allow senior housing on a six-acre Shorecliffs Golf Course parcel previously zoned for hotel or timeshare use.  The package included a bicycle and pedestrian master plan, a climate action plan, and even an endorsement of skateboards as "an efficient and legitimate transportation mode." Criticism at the adoption meeting came primarily from residents and management of the Capistrano Shores Mobile Home Park. City officials offered assurances that the park's designation would not change under the Plan. Park residents had previously expressed alarm over Coastal Plan drafts they viewed as seeking to dismantle their neighborhood for open space.  The council now turns to implementation steps: revising zoning and the Housing Element, and preparing a Local Coastal Program to receive delegated permitting authority from the Coastal Commission. The city's Web page on the plan is here at http://san-clemente.org/sc/GP2Column.aspx?PageID=1000. Details on the approval meeting are here  and, in Council minutes here . E scondido Approves 99-Cent Store Interpreting its unusual ordinance that restricts the location of  "fixed-price" discount stores," Escondido has voted to permit a 99-Cent Store in the downtown area. Old Navy recently left the downtown area, and a debate ensued as to whether to permit a discount store in its place.  99-Cent Stores are often dismissed as being too downscale for many retail districts and creating problems for neighbors � for example, shopping carts sometimes stack up at nearby bus stops. But as retailing has changed over the past few years resistance has lessened. The Escondido Planning Commission denied the project , claiming that it violated the Downtown Specific Plan, which calls for creative and arts-related uses of downtown spaces.  But the City Council overturned the Planning Commission on a 3-2 vote.

The City of Davis has adopted an ordinance that requires housing developers to provide a percentage of new units to people making 120% to 180% of median income. The ordinance also creates a lottery for the new units favoring local workers, and limits the resale prices. Most inclusionary housing ordinances target low- and moderate-income families — people making up to 120% of median. Davis already has such an ordinance, but city officials want to ensure that people with good jobs in Davis can live in the city, where few homes are available for less than $600,000. The ordinance targets individuals making about $51,000 to $76,000 a year, or families of four bringing in $72,000 to $109,000 annually. The middle-income housing ordinance adopted in December by the City Council requires developers of projects with 26 to 35 units to provide 10% of units for people making 120% to 180% of median, developers of projects with 36 to 49 units to designate 15% of units, and projects with at least 50 units to include 20% of units for middle-income families. Those requirements are on top of the 20% inclusionary requirement for low- and moderate-income families. The city will use a lottery to select potential buyers. Local employees can get four tickets, disabled people will get two tickets and anyone may get one ticket. City officials want local workers to get the housing units, but there are legal problems with excluding others, said Principal Planner Bob Wolcott. The weighted lottery is a compromise. The ordinance also caps annual increases in resale prices at 5% per year to ensure that the units remain affordable to the target population for a long time, Wolcott said. The lottery and resale price limitations were at least as controversial as the basic concept of a middle-income housing requirement. “It’s all tied in with the council asking some questions about why we want to grow and how much,” Wolcott said, noting the city has settled on an approximately 1% annual growth rate based on a study of local workers’ housing needs. SunCal Companies has acquired the 167-acre campus of the former Oak Knoll Naval Medical Center in the Oakland hills for $100.5 million. Although planning is still in the early stages, SunCal is considering a mixed-use project that takes advantage of the site’s bay views and close proximity to transit, SunCal spokesman Steve Greyshock said. “The potential for this property is just enormous,” he commented. The auction of the hospital, which closed in 1996, is the third major sale of surplus military land in California to developers during the last few years. In early 2005, Lennar purchased 3,700 acres of the former El Toro Marine Corps base in Orange County. Prior to that, three developers bought 235 acres of the former Marine Corps base in Tustin. Over the strong objection of military officials, the commission looking for a new San Diego airport site has chosen to examine Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, North Island Naval Station and Camp Pendleton. At a December meeting of the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, representatives from all three bases urged the panel not to consider the bases. They said a joint-use airport or a separate civilian airport on one of the bases would jeopardize military operations and base security. “Absolutely, positively not doable at Camp Pendleton,” community liaison Larry Reynolds told the authority’s board. However, board members pointed out that the state legislation creating the authority included a provision for the study of both civilian and military sites. The panel is charged with finding a way to handle passenger and cargo growth because Lindbergh Field is highly constrained. Thus far, the panel has narrowed civilian options to three: a site near Campo just north of the Mexico border in eastern San Diego County, a site along Interstate 8 in Imperial County, and expansion of Lindbergh. The panel plans to make a recommendation this spring, with voters scheduled to decide in November 2006. The City of Los Angeles has made peace with three neighboring cities, Los Angeles County and a citizens advocacy group regarding an overhaul of Los Angeles International Airport. At the behest of new Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the city dropped most parts of a controversial modernization plan. In exchange, the county, the cities of El Segundo, Inglewood and Culver City, and a citizens group called Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion agreed to drop lawsuits against Los Angeles. Los Angeles has spent more than a decade and approximately $150 million planning airport expansion and modernization. Cities near the airport and their residents have fought vigorously, saying the plans would result in too much noise, traffic congestion and air pollution. They have advocated spreading out air traffic to other Southern California airports. According to the settlement agreement announced in December, Los Angeles will work with the Federal Aviation Administration, the Southern California Association of Governments, air carriers and others to increase flights at Ontario and Palmdale airports, both of which Los Angeles owns. The settlement also calls for the city to close two airport gates per year for five years once the airport hits 75 million passengers in a year. The closures would result in a total of 153 gates at LAX, which now handles about 62 million passengers a year. The FAA prohibits airports from capping the number of passengers, but closing gates allows the city to limit passenger numbers. Under Mayor Richard Riordan, the city adopted a plan to accommodate up to 89 million passengers a year at LAX. The settlement permits Los Angeles to proceed with some projects, including moving a southern runway to decrease the chance of airplane collisions, rebuilding the international terminal to accommodate the largest Airbus planes, and installing a new baggage system. A former Los Angeles County Planning Department employee has been sentenced to four years in prison after pleading guilty to three counts of falsification of public records. Emmett Taylor was fired in 2000 after investigators alleged that he had collected $500,000 in “consulting fees” in exchange for issuing certificates of compliance — documents that verify the legality of a parcel. The certificates are most often sought by a landowner whose property was the subject of a very old subdivision map. Taylor was arrested in 2002 and charged with 97 criminal counts. Eventually, the district attorney’s office identified 347 illegal parcels for which Taylor had issued certificates, mostly near Malibu and Agua Dulce. Taylor, who may be eligible for a work release program, was also ordered to pay $1.53 million in restitution. Development of the third phase of the giant Mountain House project near Tracy has been approved by the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors. Phase three, to be built by three developers and San Joaquin Delta College, will include 2,400 housing units, a 150-acre business park, a 100-acre community college campus, and a large community park. Approval of the third phase nearly got stymied by a demand from Trimark Communities, Mountain House’s master developer, that Delta College pay $15 million that Trimark had fronted for infrastructure. Delta refused to pay, but housing developer Gerry Kamilos agreed to cover the college’s portion of infrastructure costs. Although Mountain House was originally approved in 1995, buildout of the 14,000-unit project is less than 10% complete. The Port of San Diego has selected a developer for a project that port officials say could become an iconic gateway to the city. The Port Commission selected Federal Viejas LLC — a partnership of a San Diego County Indian tribe and Federal Development of Washington, D.C. — to develop the Embarcadero Circle project. On a parking lot at Broadway and Pacific Highway, the Federal Viejas proposes a cruise ship terminal, a 500-room, 27-story Marriott hotel, a 250-room, 16-story Ritz-Carlton, concert facilities, restaurants, shops and a parking structure with 3,000 spaces. The project is expected to cost at least $500 million. The Port Commission rejected three other proposals, including a larger one from Douglas Manchester. Port officials said they already have approval from the Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission for a project of the scope envisioned by Federal Viejas. Manchester’s larger project would have re-opened the state review process. Santa Clarita property owners have rejected the proposed creation of an open space and parkland preservation district. In a vote-by-mail election, 53% of 17,257 property owners who returned ballots voted against the district. The district would have assessed single-family homes $25 a year, with assessments rising based on inflation. City officials estimated the assessments would have raised about $1.5 million annually for purchasing open space, creating wildlife corridors and renovating existing parks. City officials also hinted that the district might provide a method to limit growth in unincorporated areas around the city. Creation of the open space district failed despite the lack of organized opposition. Meanwhile, Santa Clarita’s 15-year fight over a proposed sand and gravel quarry just outside of town is moving to the Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission. The city has filed an application with LAFCO to annex 1,885 acres in Soledad Canyon, off Highway 14. The territory includes the site where Cemex, Inc., wants to operate a quarry, a project that the city has fought from every angle because of traffic, air quality and aesthetic concerns. Several years ago, LAFCO denied Santa Clarita’s application to add to the territory to the city’s sphere of influence. The city lost the latest legal round in late November when a federal district court upheld the Interior Department’s environmental impact statement for the proposed quarry. Even though the city owns some of the land involved, the BLM owns the mineral rights and has leased them to Cemex. Santa Clarita said it would appeal the district court’s decision. State litigation is pending in the Second District Court of Appeal.