Blogs

It seems that the government always has the advantage in its ongoing legal battle with property rights advocates. But recently, property owners scored two big wins – although a government agency was responsible for one of the property owners' victories.

If you can tolerate a little smugness and edginess, college towns are often the best towns of all � and college downtowns are often the best downtowns, especially in small cities.

The other shoe has dropped on the SB 375 front, as the California Air Resources Board has more than doubled the target for greenhouse gas emissions reductions to be obtained through regional planning.

SB 375 has left a lot of public commentary in its wake, but none more hilarious than a hostile editorial in the reliably libertarian Orange County Register, which refuses to believe that anyone in the homebuying marketplace would ever want to purchase anything other than a single-family house on a large lot.

While it seemed as if Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed every land use bill besides SB 375, he did in fact sign several pieces of legislation. Although some bills are minor in nature, some pieces of legislation make important changes to aspects of the general plan law, authorize funding for courthouses and parks, and even ease development of a mixed-use project on the Sacramento waterfront.

Here's a look at some of the more important land use bills that the governor signed:

While Gov. Schwarzenegger signed the high-profile SB 375, he vetoed nearly every other land use bill of consequence this year. Legislation regarding financing, fire safety, school fees, the California Environmental Quality Act and other matters all failed to escape the governor's red pen.

One of my personal commitments during the last year or so to a more sustainable future is to take the train and transit whenever I travel if time and routes permit.

With news of yet another Wall Street icon or banking giant tumbling arriving on an almost daily basis, the Congress and Bush administration enacting a massive $700 billion bailout to prevent a complete meltdown (which is probably only the first installment), and the stock market gyrating wildly with each new shockwave, planners may wonder what all this may mean for planning practice (that is, after they finish anguishing over their own pension plan or investment portfolio).