HomeMy WebLinkAbout0488.091Oct,ober 31, 1991
THE HONO~_BLE CITY COUNCIL
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
THE~ECTOF
THr".,IEPORT
rSA
COUNCIL PRIORITY
Regional Governance an_", Gr_c:l'{"Tth )fan;>JJgement proposal~ ___ :_~_~_atus Report
Members of the Council:
Report in Brief.
The Council selected Reoional Governance as one of its prioriti~s
for 1991, stating its intention to revie\o,', evaluate and develop
council policy related to the various region~l governance
proposals. The purposes of this report are 1) to provide an update
on events and activities surrounding those propos.als and 2) to
affirm the Council's strategy for affecting those proposals.
Bay Vision 2Q_20
The coun~il studied the regional governance proposal of the Bay
Vision 2020 Commission and adopted a position on Jun€. 1,), 1991
(refer to CMR:242:91 and CMR:J15:91.) In the months since the.
publication of the Bay Vision 2020 Cor..mission1s document ... wrk on
advancing the Commission's rec-:ommendations has been conduct'=!d
through the Bay Vision Action Coali tiorj Interim Steering committee
(BVAC) and the Bay Vision :2 02{] Local Elected Convenors (BVLEC).
Their intentions are to flesh out the reco:rn.:mendations so they may
be carried fQrward in state legisla'tion. Their efforts have
focused on the foi lowing: defining the duties of the interim
regional corrrmiss ion (IRe) ; identi fying what issues '."i 11 be
addressed as the regional plan is developedj planning t~.e
transition which ~ill occur as the existing agencies are merged
into the n~w IRe; and deterrnir.ing the composition and size of the
governing board of the IRC+
In September. BVAC produced an outl i ne of the details of the
proposal upon \lThich its mer.'.bers had reached general agreement by
that date. The docu:rnent, ... ·hir:h is Attachment #1 to this staff
report, \oTas pre~ared as a resource for the subregional meetings
which .... ere held at six locations throughout the Bay Ar-ea during
September. Co-sponsored by the 1\ssociation of Bay Area
Governrnents l the Bay Vision 2020 Local Elected convenors, and the
League of Women Voters of the Bay Area, the rne~tin9s .'ere intended
to solicit elected officials' questions apd perspectives regarding
CMR:488:91
-,
9
o
Page 2
regiona 1 groW't:.h management. Counci 1 Member McCo .... 'n participated on
behalf ~f the Palo Alto Council. It is staff's observation that
the meeting · .. ,rhich was held in San Jose on Septer::ber 12 was not
Wfell-p-..;.olicized ncr well-attEnded, and did n'.)t enqer.der much ",ctive
support. for the Bay Vi sior. propcsal.
To oate, one of the issues arousing the roost controve~5y, at least
in discussions in Santa Clara County, has been the composition of
the governing board: s:peci f ically, ho'"" shall th~ locally electeO'
appointed positions be ~llocated b€t~een cities and counties; shall
there be positions for nan-elected plJ.blic members; Vlho ....,i11 be
empo':rw'ered t<:l appoint the officials~ -,.. second issue \to'hich has
fostered considerable discussion is that of revenue sharing within
the region or sub-region, ,::or a tax-incentive system as an
alternative.
BVAC :met most !'ecently on October 25 and cit}· staff attended as an
observer. The ,",ork sho .... !;, in Attachment #1 is a fluid dc·cument as
BVAC, -working vith staff and ABP.G's Regional Planning Cor,.,11ittee,
cQntinues to expand and refine it. A section on economic vitality
has been drafted for inclusion in the growth D1anagement objectives
of the Regional Planning Frarr.elolo::-K, and a section dealing with the
protection of agricultural land will be pr~pared.
Much of the discussion at EWAC's recent meeting dealt 'With the
process by which the Regional plan ",,·ill be developed: what goals,
objectives, policies, and standards will flo~ upward from local
jurisdictions and subregions and ~hich of these must come from the
top dO'Wrl (from state or regional body); are three years adequate
time to draft the Plan; how, and by whom~ should subregions be
defined and ~hat ~ill their role and authority be,
BVAC and BVLEC have deliberatE-ly restricted the membership of their
bodies~ apparently so they r:.ay more rapidly craft their
recorom~ndations. The exclusive nature of these bodies has resulted
:..n criticism, as is expressed in the letter from Vice :fw!.ayor
castillo of Sunnyva le ... thiCh aCCCt-,pan 1 es this staff report in the
packet. Pale Alto is among those cities ~hich have experienced the
difficulty she cites, of bejng unable to hav~ a direct voice in the
process.
The Association of Bay Area Govern::-,ents' Fall General A.ssembly
scheduled for November 21, 1991 ,",'ill be devoted to the issu~s of
regional governar,ce and gro· .... th management. The ABAG Executive
Board intends to ask General Assembly voting delegates to adopt a
platform expressing ).BP.G's position on the reorganizati.:>n of
regional ag~Dcies, the duties of a regional commission, the size
and composition of a regional body, and related fiscal issues -in
other 'Words, the: proP0sai emerging from B·iAC.
CMR:488:91
\
---........ _--
page 3
Los Altos Council Merr,ber Penny Lave, President of the Santa Cl21ra
county cit.ies Associat.ion l r.as. .... ritten to t.he BVJI.C chairman
expressing the Sa!'lle concern as Vice Mayor ca5tillo and urging that
all elected officia.ls from Bay Area cities and counties have an
opportunity to participate in the process b~fore a proposal for Bay
Area regie-mal governar,::e is acvocated by BVAC at the state le'w'el.
(See Attach![l,ent 12).
During septePlber and October, the cities of Santa Clara county
began to work ..,i thin the Cities Association to agree upon ell
position st.atement on regioJ"lal governance. The statement is
contained in Attach~ent #2. There are points within the position
which de not have the unanimous support of all the cities. It is
unlikely that an absolute consensus can be achieved, but even thos'E!
ci ties opposed to the structure proposed in Bay Vision 2020 have
expressed 'willingness to participate in the Cities Associ at ion
discussion s~ssions and look for voluntary means of regional
cooperation.
The regional governance di scussicn "II'i11 continue' at the next
meeting of the Cities Associat ion Board of Direct.ors on Novemher
14. 1991.
Five key bills dealing W'ith grDIoI'th management and regional
governance ~re positioned for action when the Legislature convenes
in January 1992. These are AB 3 (Brawn). AS 76 (Farr/, SB 434
(Bergesen)~ S8 797 (Morgan), and SE 929 (presley). These are among
the bills previously 3iscussed in CMR:244:91. As introduced, each
bill approaches the issues trom a different perspective. It is the
intent of the Legislature and the Governor that the. several
proposals. .... ill com;erg-= into a coordinated legislative package in
1992.
A joint interim he~ring of the Senate Local Government Co~~ittee~
the Senate Select committee on Planning for California's Growth,
and the }.ssembly Local GoYern::,ent Co:rnrnittee will be held in
Sacramento on October 31, 1991. The hear ing agenda is entitled
"Growth Management: Executive Efforts, Legislative proposals and
Building COnS€!15us.J1 The legislators ""i11 be brIefed on the
reports of the Growth Management Consensus Project conducted under
the auspices of the Center fo~ california studies at Cal state,
Sacramento.. and the 'Hork of the. G';)v€cr-nor's Tnteragen,=y Counci 1 on
Gro'III'th Mana.ger..2nt. Invited represerJtatives f["om a broad spectl:'unl
of organizations -",;hich are "stakeh-olders" in the gro .. rth management
CMR:488!91
•
;'.
t
I
f
i
t
. ,~.
o
Page 4
issue · .. ill p:-esent t,~eir vie\ro's on the legislative prop<Jsals. In
order to :be alert to 'WhC!:t to expect trom the LegiElature in
.January, staff wi 11 att.end and report back to counci 1 on the
subgtance of the hearing.
League of Calif.9rn1.a Cities
The League of California Cities adopted a growth management
strat.egy in Decemper 1989, the purpose of whiCh .'as to serve as:
5tateme~ts of policy to place before the Legislature, the Governor,
and local 90vernme~t. The strategy anticipated many of the issues
and proposals ~hich are presently being debated locally and at the
state level.
Usinq that 1989 document as a. foundation, the League's Grovrth
Management and Regional Issues polic;y com,lIittee is further refining
the League's positions on the issue~ apt to be encountered as the
Governor and Legislature move forward on grOwth management
legislation. At the most recent meeting af the; cOlJU!tittee, on
october 12. 1391, discussion focused on the follo~ing:
1) the changes needed in the state, regional and local
planning process in ol"der to improve planning and local
government's ability to deal with difficult grovth
isslJt:!s;
2) reform of the current revenue a!'ld tax structure of the
state and local governments as relates to any cnanges in
the growth management planning structure;
3) the governance and
structuring gro~th
subregional le ..... els~
organization options
J!'.anagement at the
available for
regional and
staff is !:',(,I"litoring the work of thi:.; committee and l~!ill provide
COUncil with t.he results of the cOID-:r,ittee's ""'ork · .... hen a final draft
is available~
~9ncl\!:.;;ion
Over the past several months, Palo Alto has expressed its support
for the creation of a regional organization such as envisioned by
the Say Vision 2020 Corornission. Palo Alto COUncil Members haVe
been instrumental in focusir~g the attention of the Cities
Association on the subject of regional governance.
CMR: 4SS: 91
•
t
Page 5
In the months ah<:!ad, Palo Alto r.!LJ5t clost:!ly rnoI'1itor tl~e conpcnents
of the legislatiorl package .'hich takes ferm in Sacramerlto. Palo
Alto must look for all opportunities to assure that the
characteristics endc;rsed in the Counci l' s posi tion are incorporated
in the legislation. This rnear.5 advocating Palo Alto's views
directly to the City's legislat'Jrs, as well as :",:Qrking through the
League, through ABAG I with individual cities sharing com:m~n goals,
and with the Cities .b..ssociation. The Tflore effectively the cities
'Within santa clara County and 'iliith in the nine-county Bay Area are
able to work together now, the greater the 1 ikelihood that the
state legislation ultimately enacted will allow for regional
governance to be structured to suit a regjon's needs and
characteristics rather than dictating a uniform structure.
statewide.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the council 1) support the Santa Clara county
Cities Association consensus position statement on regional
governance and :2) commit to 'ooo'orking actively through the Cities
Association, as '1I"~ll as independently, to'Nard the goal of an
effective, equitable regional decision-making process for
addressing issues of regional significance.
Re~pectfully submitted,
eti2:~~~--
Assistant to the City Manager
~~A ~ -11-~ . ,
J E FLEMING
AssistaTlt Cit}, Manager
Attachments
Related CMRs:
242:91, 4/25/91,
244: 91, 4/25/91,
315:91, 6/6/91,
402:91, 8/15/91,
410:91, 8/:29/91,
CMR: 48B! 91
Bay Vision 2020
Peg~onal Go'{ernap.ce
Bay VisiDn 2D20: City Response
The Governor' s Interag2ncy council on Gro' ... th
Management
Council Priorities for 1991 -Status Report
I
I·
r
I
I
I
.---~
./<".
iN8i.J:.:I$J'
, .'loii>"''l"lI'oIY·ffi,."j/·''~~
'13.i"""''''·11.!Jr~''''''''_ ,mtirJ.l,""''''''''''.
,..~,,"""/ft!'~JI!rcIlli!.
·,'1f:!!d,.-!noI (~""'~ "lid
i .. 'L.·~'I!!Orli.f.t.' ...... ,~
,} .... ,~~
b\l"-r!.It;'lli~,mm
;>"wc 1/t<1rIII1It'"
..... [In f 5<1\J;)IlQ
.,,""" ocnoo_
fk-ontf\l..~
'Tlmd ... ~ II.-.rn~
'..l1l Fm"ol:o.."" C,\ ''''ID.~
.~;; ...... ~;-'"
~\.~ ~l;.. ' .. !->oj.'!"
-,
' ..
o
rntroduction
RECEIVEv
SfP I 6 1991
ASSISTA ~T crrr liCit
a Attachment 1
September, 1991
DISCUSSION OUTLINE
The Bay Vision Action Coalition ~as formed
earlier this year to advocate the qeneral recommenda
tions of the Bay Vision 2020 Commission, a~d to develop
further proposals to help ala borate on these reco~enda
tions. The coaliticn c~nsists thus fa~ of an interi~
steering committee composed of (l) some m€mbers of the
Commission itself. and (2) members of the three qroups
that created the commission --officials of local
government, the Bay Area Council, and the Greenbelt Al
liance. The committee's chair is I. Michael Heyman,
chair o~ the BV 2020 Ccmmis5ion, p~ctessor of law ana
city planning at UC Berkeley, and former chancellor of
UC Berkaley~
At a meetinq on September E, the steering com
mittee members found general agreement on the proposal
below, which they su~mit for public discussion. Not all
members agree totally with all recommendations~
Proposa)
1. Merger. The three independent regional
agencies --say Area Air Quality Manaqement Dis
trict (BAAQMO), Metropolitan Transit Commission
(MTC), and Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG) --woul~ be ~erged into a new Regional Com
mission for the Bay Area~
(NOTE: Some co~ittee members believe the San Fran
cisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
should be inclUded in the initial merger, and some
that it should be merged no later than the comple
tion of the Regional
Commission's plan.)
1
~ •
!
-.
___ .... -... iI-I""" ___ ~._~ ____ ,,_
,~ ; j
1~ oJ 1":':,; 1.,:.7
2. pu;j?§ ot the new CQmmission~ The new Regional Commission
eReJ ~ .. ould:
(a) continue to ca~ry out tr.e lEgal responsibilities of the
B..V"QMD ~ MTC, ana ABAG;
{b) Prepare a regional plan along the lines proposed by thE
BV 2020 Commission and explained more fully in the attached
planning !rame~ork~
3. Transition period. A one-year t~ansition period would ~e es
tablished during which the new Regional Commission ~ould come
into existence and, during this year, the three reqion81
aqencies --BAAQMD. MTC, and A8AG --would remain ir.tac~. The
new Reqional Commission would:
(a) Hire an executive director and instruct him or her T.O
prEpare a ccmbined budget and mer~er plan;
(b) Prepare, through briefings and othe~ means} to as~ume
the responsibilities of the three agenciz5 at the end of the
year; and
(c} Secure app~opriate approval as needed from State and
Feder~l agencies tor fulfilling the responsibilities of the
regional agencies that will be consolidated •
.(. Composition of the gc ... erning board. The governing board of
the new Regional Ccmmission vould have t~o-thirds locally-elected
officials and one-third public members. They vould oversee the
Regional Commission for the first tour years, a~ which time a per
manent governing board would be chosen either by appoif1.tmel"'.t. or
direct election. The initial governing board members vould be
chosen as tollows:
{a} Local officials. The elected officials of the city and
county governments (Mayors, council Members, county Super
visors) 'Would be chosen by their peers in each ot the nine
Bay Area counties.
2
t' S-
f "-
-",;.. 'h ~'t.~rt,:~
-,
<.
(b) Public me1!!bers~ The public l:Iembers would be appointed
by the locally-elected Officials chosen by their peers to
serve on the governing board. The appointmen'ts '''''Quld be!
made through a ~r.ique no~ination and screening process.
Nominations ~ould be ~ade by individuals and organilations;
the nominations ~ould be submitted to the say Vision 2020
Commission. To be considered for appointment, a nominee
would be a Bay Area resident with knowledqe~ interest, ex
perience, or accomplishment in issues of regional importance
in ~~e nine~county say Area.
The Commission would be directed to submi~ to the local
government members ot the new Commission a panel ot nominees
three times as large as the number of public appoint~ents
available. The lccal-gover~ment offieials would be required
to appoint public memcers from this list, and could not add
to it. '!'he commission 'Would be directed to submit a list of
nominees ".tho have kno'w'ledge and ability on issues of
regional impo~tance such as the eccno~y, the environment,
and social problems; who are men and ~omen from all parts of
the Bay Area; and ~ho reflect the increasing racial and eth
nic diversity of the Bay Area. The local qovErnment offi
cials making the appointments would be directed to choose
nominees to assure, to the extent feasible, a governing
bo~rd reflective of the geographic. gender, and ethnic diver
sity of the region.
5. Size of governing bq3rd. The governinq board ~ould have
a total or between 39 and 56 members. (~his compa~es 'w'ith a
total at 77 now on the governinq boards of BAAQMD, MTC, and
AilAG.) Al thouqb. larqe, a board of this size is necessary to
Assu:!'e representation for small cities and cO'.lnties 'While
also insuring that larq.o:!r citJ.es and counties are repre
sented in general proportion to their popul~tion.
6. Planning period. The Regional Commissicn would have
three years, after the transition year. to prepare the
Regional Plan. During this period, the Regional Commission
would have n2 land use authority beyond that of the merged
agencies. (NOTE: Some Committee Members believe the
Regional Commission should be empowered to review anne~a
tions of regional signifi~~nce curing the planning peri~d.)
7. Regional plan. The attached discussion paper on the
regional planning framework defines objectives for the plan
and a p~ocess for developing it.
3
•
-_.' -----_ ... _-----_.-
PROPOSED
REGIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OBlEcrIVES
A. Natural Envirorment
Prote.ct and enhance the air I water and open land resouz·ces neces
sary to the health and wall-being or present and future genera
tions; and to the sustainable ecological health ot the region.
1. Achieve compliance with applicable federal and state
standards for air and water quality.
2. Develop a regional policy plan which identities and
securely protects open land not within urban growth bound
aries ~or plant and animal habitats, comme.rcial agriculture,
recreation and the protection of scenic Qr cultural
resources ..
). Allow rural, non-resource related, uses of open land
•
only where compatible with agricultural and open space objec
tives.
4. Restore and maintain the ecological health of the San
Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary, and other rivers, ~atersheds,
aquifers ana wetlands throughout the reqion.
S. Development p~iorities
Establish a city-centered concept of urban development by direct
ing growth into or a~ound existinq communities. and by encourag
ing compact development in areas outside existinq communities.
1. Define the region's major urban c~nters, channel sig
nificant public investment to those areas, and establish ad
ditional incentiYes for private investment.
2. Develop vacant and unde~used lands in existing com
munities ~he~e services are available.
1
""---::--~-_______ ~M~·~'_:, __ ",,---·--''"----'-'''-
.... 0; ...
, I,
3 ~ When necessary to develop other land, ensure t~at sue.'''l.
dev-alopment is compact and, ;..oherever-possible, c~n'tinuous
with existing urban areas.
4. Identiry significant historic features of the cuilt and
natural environment, and -ancouraqe sensitive developme.'"lt to
preserv-e and enhance them.
5. R8viaw rol~ ot .ater quality and vater-supply i~ growth
manaqement an~ formulate recommendations for including addi
tional public agencies into the RC it appropriate.
C. Urban Growth Boundaries
Ens~re that planned urban qrovth is guided to regionally ap
propriate locations and that urban areas are distinct from the
cCluntryside.
1. Establish ti~, long-range urban growth boundaries tor
all urban areas consistent with natural environment objec
tives and overall regional development priorities.
2. Ensu~e that adequate area is included ~ithin urban
growth boundaries to protect against an unusual escalation
in land and housinq prices.
J~ Employ strategies within urban growth boundaries, such
as public infrastructure investment and expeditinq toe
development review pr~cesses, to promote infill and
rehabilitation or existin~ properties and to foster per
mitted development consistent 'With the protection of quality
of life within existing communities.
4. Protect land located beyond urban growth boundaries tor
agriculture and open space uses.
D. Housi.nq Supply and Attordability
Ensure "'hat all parts ot the developed region have varied housing
supply, affordable and available to present and future residents.
1. Develop a regional housing policy plan, based on
regional standards, local plans, and ~ system ot incentives
tot" meeting housir.q needs.
2
•
2. Encourage flexibility and coordinated ~fforts to ex
p4dite develQpment of new housing ana to build th~ varicus
types and prices of housinq that respond to the region's
housi"g market as ~ell as to special local and subregional
needs.
J. Enlist the support of development and financial com
munities to inc~ease opportunities tor needed housing, and
advocate for additional outside tin~r.cial assista~ce.
F. Reqional Hocility
Create dev~lopment patterns that facilitate safe, convenient and
reasonably priced mobility by transit ana other non-autcmoti~e
mean$, ~nd discourage long distance automobile commuting.
1. EstaQlish development patterns ~ith sufficient residen
tial and commercial density to support cost-effective tran
sit.
2. En~~ura9~ ne~ pedestrian-oriented development that
provides & range of services and amerdties to reduce auto
use during non-commute times.
J. Coordinate the location and type of housing and employ
ment centers to encourage shorter commutes and er~ance
tranS i't-oriented home-to-work mobil i ty.
4. Support the ~eyelop~ent of diverse types of public and
private transit services within urban areas to facilitate
travel, partieularly the ho~e-te-~ork commute.
F. Public Facilities
Ensure that public facilities to support regional development
priorities are available in a timely and cost-effectiv¥ manner.
1. 14Bnti~y facilities that are ~egionally significant and
astablish standards for their siting and development or ex
pansion.
l~ Promote interju~isdictional cooperation to eliminAte
costly duplication of public facilities.
3. Promote concurrency of nev development.
J
, ,
•
~. ----~--~-... -...
j
•
e; dCIL
o
G. Fiscal Strategy
Seek Acditional revenues to addra~s jobs-bc~sing balance, meet
costly service mandates and provide for maintenance of existing
pu~lic facilities as ~ell as needed future in~rastructure.
1. Inclu~e, as an element of the regional plan, provisions
tor reqier.al sha~in9 ot tax income from new commercial, in
dustrial, and high-cost re5idential development.
2. Advocate new ~nd ~ore flexible state and federal funding
~o suppert achievement of critical regional goals, par
ticularly ilDprovinq housing supply i!I.nd afforda.bility, and
developinq mass transit.
3, Initi6t~ leqisl~ticn that permits the region to generate
revenue to fund comprehensive planninq and infrastruct~re.
H~ c.rowth strategy
S~udy and make recommendations on policies to address the lonq
term natural resource and economic impacts of continued popula
tion qrowth in the Bay Area, ensuring rai~ness to and participa
tion by all racial, cultural and econo~ic groups.
DEVELOPING AN IKtEGMTEQ GROWTa MANAGtMtNT STRATEGY
Local $ subregional and reqional levels ot government, along ~ith
Bay Area citizens, are to participate in creating and managing an
inteqrated syste~ of ~ecision-makin9 in the B~y Area. This
proces5 shall emphasize cooperation and coordination based on
clearly identified ana shared responsibilities fo~ ~anaging
qro....-th.
It. five year planning process is envisioned. F.egicna.l conservation
and dev~lopment policies and standards vill be developed and
adopted during the tirst three years. Ourinq the following two
years, cities, counties, L¢cal Agency Formation Commissions, Con
gestion Management Agencies a~Q other gevernmental units ~ill
brinq thair plans into conformity ~ith these agreed-upon regional
policies and standArds4
4
-" ..
•
-.
A. Year One
Develop necessary resou~ces and ensure that each city, county or
s~b-reqion identities cverall qoals and special needs early,
before r~qional conservation and development policies and stan
dards are prepared.
1. Reqional Commission reaffirms and clarities regional
goals and objectives in enabling legislation.
2. A public educaticn proqram will be developed to explain
the objectives ana process# describe how citizens can be in
volved, and illustrate tools that can be employed at the lo
cal L~d &ubre9ional level to achieve regional objectjves.
3. Regional Commission develops workplan and concentrates
on collecting information, addressing funding needs and
clarifying procedures, definitions and implementation
details.
~. Local jurisdictions review their own existing goals~
objectives, and policies within the context of adopted
regional pla~~inq qoals and objectives contained in the ena
bling legislation, as clarified by the Regional commissior.~
This will include indentityinq special needs~ questions and
concerns to be considered in preparing future regional
policies and standards.
5. Existing or new subregional o~ganizations may be given
responsibility by certain local jurisdictions to coordinate
an~ represent their interests in the futUre development ot
regional policies and 5tandards. Such subregional orqaniza
tio~~ could also serve to resolve interjurisdictional i~con
sistencies and foster understanding/cross-acceptance of one
anoth~r's programs.
•
6. Local and subregional organizations shall forward recom
mendations, special needs, auestions and concerns about fu
ture regional policies and standards to the reqional agency
by the end of year one.
5
B. Year ToJO
A preliminarl comprehensiv~ regional gro~h management strategy
will be prepared.. This stl'ategy will consist ot regional conser
vation and. d:evelopment poli -::ies and standards that · .... i11 g~id:e fu
ture land use planning o!.nd (lecisiontllaJcinq.
1. Throughout this pe~iod the regional agency ~ill issue
:onthly progress reports, a~d meet at least quarterly ~ith
local policymaJcers to identi.ty concer-ns and. suggestioT,-S.
2. The public will be kept apprised of the ~e9ional
stateqy dp-velopment through the progress reports, and ~ill
ce encouraged. to attend and given an opportunity to address
commissioners at quarterly ~eetings.
C. Year Three
At the ~eqin~ing ot year three, draft regional conservation and
development policies and standards ~ill be circulated to every
jurisdi=tion in the region for comment. During the comment
period regional aqency co~issioners will participate in sub
regional workshops to answer questions and collect information.
Follo~inq receipt of comments the regional agency will stUQy com
ments and refine the preliminary dratt. At the end ot that
period. a series ot public hearings will be initiated. leading to
adoption of policies and standards by the end of the year three.
Final ~ecommendations are forwarded to state leqislature for ap
proval and possible addition of any needed povers to implement
them.
In succeedinq years, all cities, cocnties, special Districts~ Lo
cal Agency Formation Co~issions and other governmental units
will be required durin9 this pe~iod to brinq their plans into con
formity with agreed upon reqi~nal PQlicies and standards.
6
0
I •
~i f
"I
"
--
Ii .... _c ... < .... { ---,.--_-...-..........
s :> -""' Attact-..m.ent 2
;'·"f
C
C
RECEivED C
A OCT 2 1 1991 Lerague >:JI
Ca.lilOffile Cme$ ASSISTANT eny MGR.
october 18, 1991
TO: city Managers
Santa Clara County
FROM: penny Lave, President
Cities Association
RE: Position statement on Regional Governance
I have anclosed a copy of the Cities A~sociation position statement
on Regional Governance, as adopted by the BoarJ af Directors at our
meeting on October 10.
This position paper represents the beginning stage of our study of
regional governance. During the n~xt few weeks I will be ~orking
with members of the p.xecutive Committee to further refine our work
program. Given the scope and importance of the issue, I expect
that the regional governance discuzsion will continue to dominate
our agendas in the corning months.
Thank you for your ongoing assistance to the Cities Association.
We look forward to continuing to work with you on issues affecting
the cities in Santa Clara County.
Santa Clara Cour!ty Cities Association ~_'_~"t"""'J '::-."-,"5
",\;:,-ir .. ,:;, -;-~:;-;,:~,:"
,-
•
I tleCi".
s '" ~'
C
C
C
A
October 18, 1991
Ira Kichael Heyman
Chair, Bay Vision Action Coalition
Hearst Building
5 Thir~ Street, Room 608
San Francisco, CA 34103
Dear Chairman Heyman:
Last spring the Santa Clara county cities Association initiated a
study of the issue of regional governance. In particular, ~e ~ere
concerned about the impact that regional governance ndght have on
municipalities; specifically, .e wanted to evaluate its
repercussions for Santa Clara county.
The enclosed: Position statement on Regional Governance conveys the
findings from our first round of discussion. The positio~ paper
represents a consensus of opinion amol".g representatives of the
fifteen cities in Santa Clara county. Our consensus is
particularly notable given the tremer.dous diversity of size and
co~position among cities in the county.
I must emphasize, however, that this position paper should not be
vieWed as the final product of our study; rather. it represents the
beginning step in an ongOing discussion. Given the sc~pe and
importance of the issue~ ~e expect discussion of regional
goverIUlent to continue to dominate our 'Work for the foreseeable
future ..
Further, we believe that the Bay Vision 2020 process has bypassed
local decision makers and is, therefore, fundamentally flawed.
Cities have not been adequately represel'lted in the Bay Vision
COmAission or in the Bay Vision Action Coalition.. In fact, we have
struggled to even obtain basic infonnation from BVAC, including
meetinq agendas. As a result, 'We have been forced into a reactive
posture, without an opportunity to participate or provide input to
recoIQmenciations.
Accord.ingly, 'We believe that regional governance should be the
sucjec~ of a new, inclusive discussion that provides local elected
officials with the opportunity to review, debate, and participate
in the decision making process~ Recommendations that emanate from
this new, broadbased process should be the focus for the
formulation of state legislation.
Santa Clara County Cities Association
-,.".,,:"'"""!'---------_.-
C.1',''"'-(1.", GI:i'S
/, ::;0' .. ,,,,< -~'r'et
•
Regional G~vernance
Page 2
-.~ -
/
o
As locally elected officials, -we are charged with the
responsibility of repr-esenting our constituents in any discussion
of regional is~ues~ The Santa Clara county Cities Association is
eaq.er to join with other cities and counties throughout the Ba.y.
Area to dev~lvp a collaborative, inclusive approach to regional
problel:l-solvinq.
We look forward to ~orking ~ith yc~ on this complex issue.
Sincerely,
penny Lave
president:
cities Association
•
:.1
'I
o
'.111' .. ( -II .. --
s c c
C
A
POSITION BTATBXENT aE REGIONAL GOVERNANCB
Adopted by the Board of Directors
Santa Clara county Cities Association
october 10, 1991
1. The SCCCA concurs with the need for a ne~ regional cecision
making process to address issues of regional significance.
Traffic congestion, provision of affordable housing, and
environmental degradation are examples of problems that have
not been satisfactorily resolved by the existing special
p'.Jrpose regional agencies cr the independent actions of cities
in the Bay Area~
2. The consolidation of ABAC, MTC, the BAAQMD, -water quality
boards, and BCDC should be investigat~d further with the goal
of developing a more effe.:tive. decision-making process to
resolve these regional problems~
3. The interim governing board of any new regional agency should
be comprised of locally elected officials, a aajority of whom
should represent cities. Allocaticn of elected official board
members within Santa Clara. county 'Would be divided equally
between th~ Board of Supervisors, the City Council of San
Jose, and the remaining City councils.
·4. Any regional decision-making process shouJd maintain the
maximum role of ~ities in providinq ir.dividual services and
protecti!lg local community identity and vitality through
traditional land use planning methods.
5. A ftsubregional· focus shOUld be a key element in any regicnal
plan~ This can be accomplished through use of Congestion
Mar.age!Cent Agencies or other nev subregional entities that
4C"'Jcnowledge interdependencies -with counties contiguous to
counties within the oefined regional area.
6~ Some equitable method of revenue sharing should be explored to
encourage local jurisdictions to provide regior.al-serving uses
which might othe~ise be to their disadvantage ,e~g.
affordable housing, -LULUs ft ).
Santa C!ara County Cities Association C";-,','(':""-'..l ~,:,es
,'''':;Jr" '-s,-T:,:;,€!"Ef
•