Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 ABAG Growth Mgmt Report (2)I~o-~~ CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 26, 1992 SUBJECT: ABAG Platform on Growth Management (Prepared by: Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Letter from Mary Griffin, President of ABAG dated September 28, 1992 2. Proposed ABAG Platform on Growth Management dated October 29, 1992 3. Final Working Draft (Proposed Amendments to ABAG~s Spring 1992 Platform on Growth Management) 4. Letter from Henry Gardner, Chair, Alameda County City Management Association dated October 16, 1992 and attachment RECONIIKENDATION: Review ABAG Platform on Growth Management, Economic Development Advisory Board Proposal, and the Alameda County City Management Association recommendation. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Undetermined. DESCRIPTION: In the Spring of 1992, the ABAG General Assembly considered a platform on growth management. The General Assembly approved eight principles and referred the remaining ones to a group made up of ABAG's Legislative Governmental Organization Committee along with representatives of subregional planning organizations in the Bay Area. This group was asked to dev~lop recommendations on the unresolved principles included in the original platfoY-m~. Since that General Assembly meeting, a number of groups have been working on suggestions for improving the ABAG Platform on Growth Management. In the Tri-Valley area, representatives from the Cities of Danville, Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon constituting the Tri-Valley Council have worked or~ sugges~ions to i*.~epro~~ the Platform on Growth Management. Many of the suggestio~~ made by t~.e Tri-Va~~Ye~ Council representatives have been included in the pro~osed ne7a langu~ge fnr the Platform on Grow~h Management. The Alameda C's~unty Ecor~~mic De~.-~~,1:~-c=~rar~.t ~~ =si:~:o~Y~ Boa~°c~ at the s~~~ ~C:~.m~ ~~_xs~ reviewing a proposal on gre~ee~`:~i. ~~.n~~:~m~~n~. 'Ph~W° presposal cah~ ch. {•:~:~~~:: originally discussed at the ~~-~-i.x~~ ~.:;::a~_~~~~:~ ~°.:~semb~ ~~c.s be~n subst~~~~t~.A_..' ~~' modzfied k~y the Alameda Countc~ ~:'.~~z~:~:i:i«~ '"~:'.r~°~:~.-o.~y ~~ (~~~~r:~.~~.. Irx an e or o assist elec~ __ %'f~c=_:~~ ~ ~_?i '~:~~ r"~,~~.'_y~ '-.~- : _r ___: F .: : ~. :. y differenc~s between the ABAG ~;~:~pc~~~:~. .:~r~~~. ~~i:~ ~?~~G p, ~'~ :' -~__.-, '~_.: ~~°- .~c~.~: County C~ty Management Associa~-'_or°~ ~±.a_ ~~ ~~~arr~~~ ~~. cr~m~ ;_~:c, __~ <~~ °F~-:Y~r~ _'_°a'` Kit tiY~~ ~~~„~si-, af thP Alameda Co~~?-~ :~ia~•::~':`,. Cr,'trYie~Q~YCe (~::~<;~~ ~:::~a~.~~~). ~;'::.~.s regional body as envisioned can be accomplished under the existing statutory authority of the agencies proposed to be merged, and lastly, that a clear conflict resolution plan be developed and included if such a regional agency is formed. The Staff recommendation is that the Council review these proposals and provide the City Council~s delegate to ABAG with the appropriate direction on the behalf of the City of Dublin. a:1026abag.agenda#10 ~ ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS Mailing Address: ^ P.O. Box 2050 ^ Oakland, CA 94604-2050 September 28, 1992 To: ABAG Delegates and Alternates Executive Board Legislative & Governmental Organization Committee Regional Planning Committee From: Mary Griffin, President ~•..,~ Re: Platform on Growth Management - On October 29, ABAG Delegates will be asked to finalize a Platform on Growth Management. Crafted by local elected officials from every corner of the region, this program addresses the diverse needs of all the Bay Area's communities. As you probably know, SB 797, the Bay Area Growth Management bill authored by Senator Morgan, did not win Senate approval. During the legislative consideration, some of our local policy makers testified that the bill was premature since ABAG was in the final stages of developing its position. The enclosed Platform on Growth Management is that position. The Platform articulates a new approach to local, subregional and regional planning and decision-making. Major features include: • Retention of local land use control • Establishment of subregional planning bodies • Consolidation of ABAG and MTC into one regional agency • Appointment of 100% local elected officials to regional governing board Two versions of the Platform are provided. The first, the Proposed Platform on Growth Management, is the document delegates will be asked to adopt. Second, the Final Working Draft, is a background piece that illustrates how the proposed principles have evolved from those submitted at the last General Assembly, We believe that Bay Area elected officials have produced an effective growth management package tailored to the unique character of our region. I encourage you to support it. lO-Zlo-9Z -7.~ Representing City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay ~ ~ '~`~ ,'~ ~~ ~. Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter ^ Eighth & Oak Streets ^ Oakland ^(510) 464-7900 f ~~ ~~~ ~ . PROPOSED PLATFORM ON GROWTH MANAGEMENT Submitted for Adoption by General Assembly Delegates of the Association of Bay Area Governments October 29, 1992 • ~ : ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ s~ ~ ~ ~'" ,~ ~~ ~'~~~ ~•~.~;; ,~~. c~ ~~ ~9 ~~~ PROPOSED PLATFORM ON GROWTH MANAGEMENT A set of growth managment principles was voted on at ABAG's last General Assembly held in San Francisco on March 19, 1992. The General Assembly approved eight principles and referred the remaining ones to a group made up of ABAG's Legislative and Governmental Organization Committee along with representatives of subregional planning organizations in the Bay Area. This group was charged with developing recommendations on unresolved principles. Following a series of ineetings, a preliminary set of changes to unresolved principles was agreed to. Reaction to the initial proposed changes was solicited and received from other local elected officials. The amendment drafting group then made modifications to its preliminary proposals. Principles shown in bold type on the attached Platform are now being submitted for adoption by the ABAG General Assembly. Those principles adopted at the last General Assembly are printed in standard type. Amendment drafting group: Councilmember Shirley D. Sisk, City of Newark (Chair) Councilmember Karen Anderson, City of Saratoga Councilmember Nanci Burton, City of Santa Rosa Mayor Gary Falati, City of Fairfield, ABAG Vice President Councilxnember Janet Fogarty, City of Millbrae Councilmember Millie Greenberg, Town of Danville Supervisor Mary Griffin, County of San Mateo, ABAG President Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, City of Petaluma Councilmember Warren Hopkins, City of Rohnert Park Councilmember Nancy Ianni, City of San Jose Councilmember Vaso Medigovich, Town of Corte Madera Supervisor Tom Nolan, County of San Mateo Mayor Peter W. Snyder, City of Dublin Councilmember Dick Spees, City of Oakland Mayor James P. Spering, City of Suisun City Supervisor Tom Torlakson, County of Contra Costa Councilmember Barbara Waldman, City of Sunnyvale Councilmember Lonnie Washington, City of Richmond The Association of Bay Area Governments Platform on Growth Management COORDINATED/INTEGRATED PLANIVING PROCESS 1. The planning process in California should be broadly coordinated and integrated at the state, regional, subregional and local levels. Regional, subregional and local planning will be most effective if the state first coordinates its oversight so as to provide clear and consistent planning- related goals and programs. A primary focus should be on reorganization of responsibilities for efficiency and on consolidation and streaxnlining at all levels. The process for achieving this integration should be derived with input from a111eveLs of government. 2. Governance is handled best at the closest level to the governed. Thus the planning process should be structured so that local issues are handled locally in General Plans, subregional issues are handled at a county or other subregional level and regional issues only are handled at the regional level. Moreover, greater efficiency and effectiveness in the planning process is desired; not a new layer on top of existing agencies. LOCAL, SUBREGIONAL AND REGIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES 3. Local jurisdictions should be responsible for ongoing coordination of local plans with state, regional and subregional growth management strategies. They should retain full land use regulatory powers. 4. There are planning issues that transcend single cities and require coordi- nated subregional planning. Subregional planning bodies should be estab- lished following the desires of each subregion. Initially, the county level would be assumed to be the appropriate geographical area; however, nothing should preclude two or more counties from forming such a planning entity. The County Board of Supervisors and City Councils would identify either an existing body or a new one to provide subregional planning and review functions. 5. Portions of two or more counties having a commonality of interest such as commute patterns or environmental, open space and/or economic issues shall be encouraged to form a subregional planning body. The Association of Bay Area Governments Platform on Growth Management 6. Subregional planning bodies should develop a subregional strategy to address the following issues: • countywide development form: urban development strategy • natural resource protection • subregional mobility • subregional jobs-housing balance • housing supply and affordability • coordinated planning among cities and with adjacent counties Other functions of the subregional planning bodies could include: • brokering of local housing needs allocations for jurisdictions wishing to "share" housing development responsibilities ~ negotiation of a revenue sharing plan • Congestion Management Planning functions • Local Agency Formation Commission functions. 7. There aze planning issues of regional importance that affect the whole of the Bay Area. Some of these issues aze: • regional pattern of development • regional mobility • adequate housing supply and affordability • coordination of jobs and housing development • regional open space and agricultural land preservation • social and economic vitality and equal opportunity • coordination of infrastructure and major facility planning and siting with expected timing of development. Regional goals and policies should be structured upon plans of cities, counties and subregions and seek to reconcile and coordinate planning issues that transcend single cities and counties. A regional planning body should review and advise local and subregional agencies on their consis- tency withregional needs and state policies. Local and subregional bodies should review their plans to assure consistency with developed regional goals and policies. -2- The Association of Bay Area Governments Platform on Growth Management CONSOLIDATION OF SINGLE-PURPOSE AGENCIES 8. Land use~ transportation and air quality planning issues are insepazably inter-related. A plan should be developed for the proposed merger of the Association of Bay Area Governments and the Metropolitan Transporta- tion Commission, and the policies in this plan should ensure tha~ this merged agency would have no additional powers other than those currently vested in the existing agencies activities would be structured so as to achieve cost-reductions relative to the expenditure levels of existing agencies the efficiency of the plans, planning process and the organization aze increased In the future, it may be appropriate to consolid ate some or all the functions of other agencies. 9. Local elected city and county representatives will constitute the governing board of the merged regional body and be appointed by each subregional planning body. 10. A public advisory board to the regional body will be established and attempt to reflect the gender, ethnic and economic diversity of the region. In addition, a technical advisory committee to the regional body will be established comprised of technical personnel from the staff of the agen- cies in the subregion. CONFLICT RESOLUTION 11. Conflict resolution mechanisms are needed during plan formulation and to negotiate compromise when jurisdictions disagree about such issues as appropriate mitigation for project impacts, facility siting, etc. The resolution process should stress early negotiation (conflict avoidance). Conflicts should be resolved at the lowest level possible; first among disputing agencies, second by a subregional body and finally by the regional planning body. -3- The Association of Bay Area Governments Platform on Growth Management FISCAL REFORM 12. Financial and other incentives aze preferred as a means of achieving compliance with state, regional, and subregional goals. 13. Statewide fiscal reform is needed to offset revenue-driven development policies. In addition, the state should establish stable state, regional, subre- gional and local funding sources for growth management and planning functions. 14. Existing law allows revenue shazing. Subregions may consider a revenue sharing plan to reduce the incentive for fiscal land use planning at the expense of other needs. HOUSING 15. The housing needs determination process should be restructured to better integrate overall regional and subregional growth management strategies. In addition, the housing element review process should pay greater atten- tion to performance and less to process. The state should delegate housing element review and certification to the regional planning body, if the governing board of the regional planning body elects to take on such responsibility. -4- FINAL WORKING DRAFT (Information only) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ABAG'S SPRING 1992 PLATFORM ON GROWTH MANAGEMENT A set of growth managment principles wasvoted on at ABAG's last General Assembly held in San Francisco on March 19,1992. The General Assembly approved eight principles and referred the remaining ones to a group made up of ABAG's LegislaHve and Govemmental OrganizaHon Committee along with representatives of subregional planning organiza- tions in the Bay Area. This group was charged with developing recommendations on unresolved principles. Thisworkingdraftillustrateshow theprinciplespresentedattheSPRING1992GeneralAssemblyhaveevolved. The left column shows the original language and the right column shows the new and amended language crafted by the amendment drafting group. Amendment drafting group: Councilmember Shirley D. Sisk, City of Newark (Chair) ~. ,' .. 'F ~~ ~~~ ~~: ~'~ Councilmember Karen Anderson, City of Saratoga Councilmember Nanci Burton, City of Santa Rosa Mayor Gary Falati, City of Fairfield, ABAG Vice President Councilmember Janet Fogarty, City of Millbrae Councilmember Millie Greenberg, Town of Danville Supervisor Mary Griffin, County of San Mateo, ABAG President Mayor M. Patricia Hilligoss, City of Petaluma Councilmember Warren Hopkins, City of Rohnert Park Councilmember Nancy Ianni, City of San Jose Councilmember Vaso Medigovich, Town of Corte Madera Supervisor Tom Nolan, County of San Mateo Mayor Peter W. Snyder, City of Dublin Councilmember Dick Spees, City of Oakland Mayor James P. Spering, City of Suisun City Supervisor Tom Torlakson, County of Contra Costa Councilmember Barbara Waldman, City of Sunnyvale Councilmember Lonnie Washington, City of Richmond PLATFORM ON GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORIGINAL LANGUAGE PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE Coordinated/Integrated Planning Process The planning process in California should be broadly coordinated and inte- grated at the state, regional, subregional and local levels. Regional, subregional and local planning will be most effective if the state first coordinates its oversight so as to provide clear and consistent planning-related goals and programs. A primary focus should be on reorganization of responsibilities for efficiency and on consolidation and streamlining at all levels. The process for achieving this integration should be derived with input from all levels of government. Governance is handled best at the closest level to the governed. Thus the planning process should be structured so that local issues are handled locally in General Plans, subregional issues are handled at a county or other subre- gional level and regional issues only are handled at the regional level. More- over, greater efficiency and effectiveness in the planning process is desired; not a new layer on top of existing agencies. Local, Subregional and Regional Responsibilities 3. Local jurisdictions should be responsible for ongoing coordination of local plans with state, regional and subregional growth management strategies. They should retain full land use regulatory powers. 4. There are planning issues that transcend single cities and require coordinated subregional planning. Subregional planning bodies should be established following the desires of each subregion. Initially, the county level would be assumed to be the appropriate geographical area; however, nothing should preclude two or more counties from forming such a planning entity. The County Board of Supervisors and City Councils would identify either an existing body or a new one to provide subregional planning and review functions. Coordinated/Integrated Planning Process None. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) 2. None. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) Local, Subregional and Regional Responsibilities 3. None. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) 4. None. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) ORIGINAL LANGUAGE PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE None. 5. Subregional planning bodies should develop a subregional strategy to address the following issues: • countywide development form: urban development strategy • natural resource protection • subregional mobility • subregionaljobs-housingbalance • housing supply and affordability • coordinated planning among cities and with adjacent counties Other functions of the subregional planning bodies could include: • brokering of local housing needs allocations for jurisdictions wishing to "share" housing development responsibilities • negotiation of a revenue sharing plan • Congestion Management Planning functions • Local Agency Formation Commission functions. There are planning issues of regional importance that transcend single cities and counties and affect the whole of the Bay Area. Therefore, the regional planning body should develop a regional strategic plan to address them, building on the individual plans of cities, counties and subregions. The regional strategy should broadly address the following regional issues: • regional form: urban development strategy • regional mobility • adequate housing supply and affordability • coordination of jobs and housing • regional open space • economic vitality • coordination of infrastructure and major facility planning and siting with expected timing of development. Portions of two or more counties having a commonality of interest such as commute patterns orenvironmental, open spaceand/or economic issues shall be encouraged to form a subregional planning bodX None. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) There are planning issues of regional importance that affect the whole of the Bay Area. Some of these issues are: , . , regier~a~-iy9t~ey. • regional ~attern of ferarnrb~rr development s4ratesy • regional mobility • adequate housing supply and affordability • coordination of jobs and housing development • regional open space and agricultural land preservation • social and economic vitality and eq,ual o,~portunitX • coordination of infrastructure and major facility planning and siting with expected timing of development. The regional planning body should coordinate and review local and subre- gional plans for consistency with regional and state policies. . Regional goals and policies should be structured upon plans of cities, counties and subregions and seek to reconcile and coordinate,planning issues that transcend single cities and counties. A regional planning bodX, should review and advise local and ORIGINAL LANGUAGE PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE Consolidation of Single-Purpose Agencies Landuse,andtransportationissuesareinseparablyinter-related. TheBayArea should be brought in line with California's other metropolitan areas by consoli- dating at least the functions of the Association of Bay Area Governments and the Metropolitan TransportaHon Commission. The merged agency should be guided by clear policies and should: havenoadditionalpowersotherthanthosecurrentlyvested intheexisting agencies be structured so as to operate within the expenditure levels of existing agencies In addition, it may be appropriate in the future to consolidate some or all the functions of the following agencies: • the Bay Area Air Quality Management District • the Regional Water Quality Control Board • local Agency Formation Commissions. The following principles should guide the organization of the merged regional body: • local elected representatives should form a substantial majority of the governing board • any non-elected members of the governing board should be appointed by the local elected representatives. • membership on the governing board should attempt to reflect the gender, ethnic and economic diversity of the region. • as in the case of the present ABAG Executive Board, representation should take into account population disparities; in addition, rules should be created to protect the interests of rural areas without sizable populations. Consolidation of Single-Purpose Agencies 8. Land use~ ar~ transportation and air qualit~planning issues are inseparably inter-related. • ~ ' . A plan should be developed for the proposed merger of the Association of Bay Area Govern- ments and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the policies in this plan should ensure that: this me~ed agencv would have no additional powers other than those currently vested in the existing agencies activities would be stnzctured so as to ~eve~sachieve cost-reductions relative to the expenditure levels of existing agencies the efficiency of the plans planning ,process and the organization are increased In ael~iterr the future, it may be appropriate'- `~~e to consolidate some or all the functions of other agencies. . ~ ~ ~ 9. ~Y" •~eee~Local elected citv and countv representatives ti~hrrajeritp~ef will constitute the governing board of the merged regional body and be appointed by each subregional planning bod~ a 10. ~ Apublicadvisoryboardtothe regional body will be established and attempt to reflect the gender, ethnic and economic diversity of the region. In addition, a technical advisorv committee a - i i i ORIGINAL LANGUAGE Conflict Resolution 9. Conflict resolution mechanisms are needed during plan formulation and to negotiate compromise when jurisdictions disagree about such issues as appro- priate mitigation for project impacts, facility siting, etc. The resolution process should stress early negotiation (conflict avoidance). Conflicts should be re- solved at the lowest level possible; first among disputing agencies, second by a subregional body and finally by the regional planning body. Fiscal Reform 10. Financial incentives and disincentives are preferred as a means of achieving compliance with state, regional, and subregional goals. 11. Statewide fiscal reform is needed to offset revenue-driven development poli- cies. In addition, the state should establish stable state, regional, subregional and local funding sources for growth management and planning functions. 12. Subregions should consider a revenue sharing plan to reduce the incentive for fiscal land use planning at the expense of other needs. Housing 13. The housing needs determination process should be restructured to better integrate overall regional and subregional growth management strategies. In addition, the housing element review process should pay greater attention to performance and less to process. The state should delegate housing element review and certification to the regional planning body, if the governing board of the regional planning body elects to take on such responsibility. PROPOSED NEW LANGUAGE Conflict Resolution 11. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) Fiscal Reform 12. Financial and other incentives are preferred as a means of achieving compliance with state, regional, and subregional goals. 13. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) 14. Existing law allows revenue sharin~ Subregions shetx~ mav consider a revenue sharing plan to reduce the incentive for fiscal land use planning at the expense of other needs. Housing 15. Approved by General Assembly (3/19/92) `_ _[u= i-1'~±-' ~~~ 11 : 1~ I i~: C~HI'~LHhiD i_H ~= 1 T`r' ~°1G~' TEL f•!0: 51G-t-?3~=~-~'~~= #~~'4 F'G=i~ ~~ ~W~~ ~~~' ~~1~~~~~~~ ~ CITY NALL ~ UNF, CITY HALL PLAZA • i7AKt~AND, CALIFURhIA 94612 Office of City Manager (S1U} 238-3301 Nenry C. Gardner TDp {~~Ul 839-64~1 City Manager OCtober 16, 1992 Mr. Richard C. Ambroee, City Manager Gity of Dublin P.O. $OX 2030 Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Mr. Ambrose: Subject: City Managers Assacfation Growth Management Reoommenda~ions Over the pa,~t year, units of locai government havc~ bee» reviewing and discussing various p~~pQSals relating ta growth mallagement. To this end, ABAG and the Alameda County Economic Develapment Advisory Board {EDAB) have drafted growth management proposals~. As ypu will recall, the Cf~y Manaqer~ Aasoci~tion was requesteti by the Mayora Conference to compare the proppsals. Th~ City Managers Associa~ion did m~~t with representativ~es from AHAG and EDAB to review and co~npare their growth management praposals with th~ City Mariagers As~ooiation growth managament reoommendatians. Attached is a comparisan that retleats th~ curren~ ABAG platform statement, the EDAB propos~l as mpdified by the EDAH planning Diarec~ars Council composed of the Planning Directors of the cities of A~ameda Caunty, and the c~ty Managers Association grawth ma~n~rgament recommendations. The comp~rison indieates whether or Aot the C3ty Mal~agers As~saciation and the EDAB proposals are in agreement with the AHAG platform st~itsment and the specific differences between each propo~al and the ABAG platform statem~~t. A copy ~t the comp2~rison hae been forwarded to ABAG for ~hei~ review and fn~armation. In summary, there ar~ many areas of agreement between the ABAG and EDAB propc~sal~, The City Ma~ngers As~sociatian concurs with mos~. of the EDAB propos~l. However, it differs from the ABAG platform statement in the areas af completing a conso~idatian plan pr~,or ta merging any single purpo$e agencies, whether the functions af a regianal body as envie~,oned can be ~ccompli~hed under the existing statutory authority of the agencies proposed to be merged, and the n~ed fo~ a clear cp~fliot resolut~.on plan to be develape~d. !"~~~v~ i~~..~. . . [IC:T-1'~-,,~~ 11:1r~ IL):OH4C:LHhaL~ ~=:H CiT'i' f'1GF: TEL hJ[I:~1G=1-;'~~I-~~~~~~ $#=,=q_~~;-1- - - - -~~ ~2- I urge you to review the at~ached material priar to the ABAG General Assembly, If y~ur City Counail is in agreem~nt with the City Manager~ A~~o~iation recomm~nd~tions and the ~DAB prapas~l, or if yqu ~Q~1 ~dditiona]. madifications are needed~ plegge provide th~.s ~.nformation to ABAG p~`ior to, ar at, the General A~~~~nbly on Octaber ~9, 1992. Th~tnk you for your as~~istance ~.n this matter. Sincerely y . Ga ner, Ch~ir lame County City Manageme~nt A~sociatfon Attachment COM1PARlS(}1V [)F 1113A(_; {;R()W~F~ M11NA(;EMENT' 1'~.ATI~f)Rhi, Ei}AQ [:Rt)lA~"rH A4ANAC;EME~IT ~'R{)P(~SAL ~ AN~ Al.A~iEUA COI~NTY C17'Y' MAlVAGERS ASS~CIATION PRQi'QSAL ABAG RECQMMENDED PLAl'FQRM STATEi4iEA1T EDAB PitOPpSAL CTI'Y ~I~IAIVAGERS ASSOQATION COOR~INATED{INTEGRATED PLANNING PRgCESS l} The Flanning ~rcmess ~n California sl~auld ~e broadty cnordinafied and it~tegrated at the state, re~ional, subr+eglanai anc~ lacal levets. Regicrnal, subregiona~ atxf ~i planning wif! be most ~#Eecti~e if #he skate fi~st caardina4es i~s oversfght s~ as tc~ pmvide c~ear and rnnsist~ent planning-rela~ed ~oals and pnigrarns. A~rirr~ry fncus should be on reorganizaticfn crf responsibilities fUr eEfic~ency aiid on oorrsc~lidatiun a~d streacnlining at a~4 leve~s. '~e ~+rocess for achieving this integration should be cler~ved with in~ut hom all levels oF governrnent. EDAB Proposal is ~n agree~ent w~tlt the A$AG PfatFor~n statee~nent. Tl~e EDAB proposa~ also rPC~omrnends #hat the afl skate~wide agencies must caorc~inat~e ti~eir individual long-range ~lar~s for matkers of stat~wi~e Ente€esks into a comprehensive and internally ronsistent s#atewide ~lan. The scope c~f which shauld be bo adapt very t~road frame Qolicies that will ~rioribi~e the key ~lanntng el~ments for laca! gover~me~tls. S~inc~e this effori bo cr~te a stabew9de plart may Fake €orisiderable #~~, m the shart term the Ei?AB proposa! recom~ne~ds thaE the Stabe prioritize these b€oad fraEne pd~cies in the ateas of land-use, cincFalatian, and water supply. City Managers Associaiian is in agreement with th~ ASAG platform stakement an~ the EDAB t+etnrnmend~tian that the state prir~ricize key planning e~ts for ioca! gaaeinments. 2) G~ov~rnanc~e is handted ~est at the closest level bo t~e govetn~. '~us, the plann9ng proc~ess shouid be structuned so t1~at local isse~es are handled focally in the Genera{ Plarrs, subr~eg"so~l issues are handled at a Cou~ty ar at~- s~bnegional levet and regional issues are only handled at the regional level. hianeover, greate~ eFfic~ency at+d effe~ctiveness in the pla~rrring praeess a.re desired; not a n~ew layaer an fio~ of existi~ agen~es. L[)CAL„ SUHREGIONAL AND REGIO~TAL ~CESPONSIBILTIT~S 'Ti,e EDA~ proposa! is in agr+eetr~ent with the ABAG platfarm statemcnt. The City tvfanagers Associa~ion es in agr~eem€nt wikh fhe ABAG p)atfarm stab~ment. 3) irora! }cuisdictions should be resgonsible for ongoing '~e EDAB praposal is in ~gr+eement The Gty Managers Associatbon is in agreement coordinativ~n of ~ocal plans witl+ state, regional and with the ABAG ~atforr~t sta~e+~ecrt. w~th dte ABAG platforrn stabemen~ se~~regionaf growth rnanagement strategies. 71uey shauid retain fiYll ~and-use regulatvry powers. 2 4} The~e are planning issues t~t transcend singie cities a~d require ~oordinated subregional p~anning. Su~xregiosiaf ~anning bodies should be established foElow~ng the desir+es of each sub~regio~. ~nitia~~y, t4~e cou~ty lev~e9 would be assu~ved tv be t~ie appropriate geographical area; however, notfiing should pr~ecCude twn or morr caunties from farming s~ct~ a planning enNty.. The C~vnty Bo~rd t~f ~~pe~viso~s ancf City Conncils wou]d identify eit~ter an ex~sting bady or a new o~e 6o provide suhreg~onat ~lann~n,g a~d review functians. "~'he EDAB proposal is in agre~,~ent with ~he ABAG plaNorm statecn~ent. The EDAB proposai af9a reeommends that County Boatds of Supervisors an~d City Coanci~s should have the flexibility to also ~onsHder rnnsolidaHon vf existing bodies bo pravide for subregional plar~ning and r+eview functions. The City Mas~agers Association is in agreement with the ABA~ p~atform state~ent as~d the EDAB rern~nrt~endation, tha~ loral gaverninents sl~uld have flexibility to mnsolidate existin~ bodies tcr provide for subregio~al ~~anni~g and review fnnctions 5? Potteons of t~vo e~r mnre rnt~nnes having a comm~nality af T#te EDAB progosal is in agreement "li+e ~ity T~anagers Association is in agreernent interest such as com~~ate pat#erns or env;ran~enial, open wiFh the ABAG platforite stafiement. with the ABA~ p~akform skat~menk. space andlor econr~mic issues shall be e~cour~g~d tn farm a subregional ~lanning body. 61 Subregional planning bodies s~oulc~ devek~p a sufn~eg~onal strategy to address the following issues: • cauntywide cfe~relopm~ent Earm: urban deve~apment S~~~T • natura~ r~so~arce protection • subnegionat tnobility • subregiana! jobs-housing balar~ee • l~ousing supply an~ affordabil~ty • coords~ah~ planning among c~Nes an~ with adja~t ooe~nt~es 71~e EdAB pro}~osal agr+e~s that these ane the elec~+enfis of a seilx+egi~onal pl~. '~e City Managers Association beli~~es that t~+e ABAG platfoe~m statement should use the wor,d "subiyeg~onal" developmen~ instead oE cc~untywide 117 ~~t5t Of 9llbregional issnes. Tt-ey also fe3t "na#te~l resaarc+e pnobec6EOn' should be "natural tesa~+rce managernent." Gt addibon, most irnportantly t~ey bef~eve #hat a cl~ange in the words "should" atrd "oould" in thirs section would d~ange tfie wY~ole int~rt! of this sectian. As fortig as th~e issues a~d flmcfians re~r~ined f~exi~ie, they c~auld support this s#ateme~it. Other fun~cEions of the submegional plann9ng bodies muld ir~c~ude: # M~okering of lor~l tausing nc~s a~~oc~ticros for j~risdictions w ishing 60 "share" housing ~-~t ~~u~ • negoiiatian af a rev~enue sharin~ Plan ~ Congestian Manage~nent P~aeming Circ+ctions • L,ocal Agency ~arre+ation Camm~ssion functions They also c}uestion whether the functians can be aooornplished under existeng s#atutory authority gan~ed to the e~ds6ng agenc~ies- 3 T4~ere are planning issues of re~iona) i;nportance that affect ~lie whole of the Bay Ar+ea. Some of tt~ese issues are: • regional pattern of devQlopment • re~ionas mobElity • adequate housing s~gply and aFfordabijity • ooordination cyf jobs/lxisus'sn~ development • regional ope~ space and agricvlturai land ~eservation • social and eeonomic vitality and eqnal oppartunity + aoorc#i~akiart of infrastrvcwre and major facility p~anning and sitting with expecbed timing of development. The EDAS pr~posal is in agteement with tt+e ABAG platfomi stafiement. The EDAS propvsal also ~eco~n.mends that local ~urisdic~ioris shauld self- certify tliat tfieir plans ane in confom~ance with t~e subregional, regio~tal or sta6e gaa~s and palicies_ The C~ty Managers Association believes khak this statement goes beyond the scape of rnerging r~egiona! agencies. This statemerEt would ~ive s~ew powers to the mecge~ ag~ncy ta develnp regional gcacs~s an~ policies, which they naw lack under existing statutory authority. They also bef~eve that the issues should be rn~tire c~early defined in this section. Regiana! gnals and policies should be structueaer~ u~on plans af cities, counties, and subregions and seelc ta reror~cile and coard'mate plartning iss~es that transee~nd s~ng~e rities anci ~nunties. A regianat plarming body shonld r~--iew as~d advise loeal and s+~br~gional agenries on t~eir consistes~cy wittt regional needs and stabe policies. Loc~f and subnegianal bodies sh~oul~ resriew #t~r plans ta assure consisker+~y with develop~ re~ional gflals and policies. 4 CONSOLIDATIOI-F pF S[N~L~-PUAPOSE AGENCI~S 8) Land use, transportation and air quality ~1a~n~s~g ~ssues ase inseparab9y inter-related. A pfan shauld be developed fior fhe pro~ased m~erger af the AssoceaEion of Bay Area Ga~ernsnents, and ~e Metrapa~ifan Transportaticm Comrn~ssion, and the pcaliries in this plan should en.sure thaE: this rnerg~d agency woulc~ have no additianaf powets ather than ifiose currently vested i~ d~e e~dstin~ a~~; ~ekivefie5 would be stru+chered so as tn ac~eeve cost- redu~tiotbs rela~ive to the expenditure level of eacisting agerECies; fhe ef~icierecy of the plans, plannin~ prvc~ess arbd the arganization are i~creased. ln tEie future it may be appropriabe bo oonsol':date some or a1f of t~e funchans o6 atfier agencies. 'It~e EDAS pr~opvs~l agr+aes in gr~nciple The City Managers Association be[ieves that this with the ABAG ~latform sta6eYr~eF+t; seeaon indica~es ad~itic~na~ ~owers for the howe~rer, the EDAB praposal merge~ agencies. This oon~licts w':th the idea recommends Ehat: that #he agency wilf have no additiona4 powers as stated i~ t3~e pnevious sections. Bey ArPa Air Quality be included in the merger of 1~e Cit}r Managers Associat~ agrees with the ager~aes EDAB reoommendation as to a oo~ualida~icm plan being cvmplebed Qriar ba t~e merger, and A consalidation plan should #he Fo~ee~s being on stream~i~ng oF fu~ncUnns. c~ompleted ~riar b t~e actaal merges'. 7t+e prir~ipal focus €rf d+e t~ansolidation plan sl~fd be strearnl~ning of t~+e regvlabosy pr4oeas and pravid'ee~g one single decision-making poir~t of au~ority. 9) i.oca~ elecbe~ c~il~ an~ aounty rep~senkatives will oons~itu~e The EDAB pr+op~sal is in agr,ee~E #he g~vernir+g boatd nf t[~e merged regional body and witt+ t3~e ABAG plaHorm statemenk. appaitrted by each subregional plannir~g body. 1(f} A~ublic advisary board to the regional body will be established and attempt bo reflect tl~e gender, etimic and econamic diversily of the region. En addit~cm, a t~ed~n~ra! ad~isory oommittee to the regional body w~l! be eslablished rnmprised of tect~ical ~ersonne~ fmm the staEf of the agencies in the subregpon. '~'he EDAB prvpasa! does not add~ss anp pubfic or bechnical ad~is~ory cotrtm~lte~es as part of the eo~solidakioit of si~gle-purpose agenc7ies_ ~vwev~er, the fu~ctions of these m~ntnittees shonlct be de~ined and clari~ie+d as a part of the Prvpased merger p9an as described abave. The ~'ity Manager5 Assoceatiot~ agrees with fhe ABAG plat~o~m sta~ernen#. The City Ma~agers Assacia#inn believes that t~+ere shou~ n~ot be twa goveriv~g hoards - ane privabe and one publi~c, T'he gcaverning body cat set up sab-committees or task forces to advise on specific essues. '~'his wot~l~ avflid the r~:ed fnr additiona~ s#aFfing and adm~nistratie cosks in arder bo create the gaverning boar~. 5 11) Conflict resolution mechanisms are needed daring ~xlar~ formation and fio negatiate coFnprornise whe~n jUrisdicNvns disagree about svch issues as aPpt~o~riate mitigak'son tor project `sm~M «, ~~];~y S~ting, etc. The resolution pmcess should stresti early negotiation {c~nf~~et avoidance). Conflicts should be resvlved at the lowest )evel possible, first among disputing age~cies; second, by a stibregiona[ ~y, ~, ~inaliy, by the regional plannir~ txac~y. The EDAB pmposaf is ir~ a~reement Krith this ABAG platform staternent. The first sentence of the statem~ent s~uld add "consolidatian" plan. The EDAB prflpasal recommecx~s a conflict resalutio~ p~oc+ess be}~ond the periad oF the consalidation p1an, 'I'he EpAg process is based on fac~-bo-f~ce discussion and negotia~ioc~ betw~eezt disputeng parties in order fio a-~oid lit~gation. The E~AB prapn6al also ne+comrrbends that no r,eview or appea~ of review for any speciHc projeet that is tn rnnfarmance with a Eocal juris#iction's ger~eral plan should flc~ce~r at the regiona! or subregiona~ level, '~he City Managers Association believes that t~ere needs to t+e a clear cnnflict resalution plan d~eveloped, noting that ather agenries suc4~ as CMA have a conflict resoln#ion pr~-oess aiready in glace. FISCAL ItEFORM ]2} Finac~ciaf and otiver incentives are preferr~d as a means vf Ttre EDAB propoeal is in agreemen~t achieving campliaiu~e wit'#i stat~, regional, and subnegio~aE with the ABAG platform stabeineset. goals. ~'he City 14iarEagers Assodatian is in agreem~ee~t with the ASAG plaEform stabement_ 133 Sta6ewide fiscal r~eform is neec~ed to offset revenuedriven T~e EDAB ~roposal is in agr~t The City Manage~s Assoaiation is in ag~e+ement devek3pment ~olicies. In addiEian, the state stwuld with the ASAG platform sta~emeqyE, with ~e pgpG pla#form sta6e~eRt. estabfish stable sEaEe, regional, snbregioE+al, and lcx~~ fnnding soutres for growth managemeTSt and planning f~nct~ot~s, 1+1) Exis#ing law aflows nevenue s~hari~. Subtegio~ts ~nay 11~e EDAB pro}~os~al is in ag~eerr~t aansider a r+everEUe sharing plan to rednc5e the ~ncec~dve far with the ABAG platform sta~t, ~sca~ land-nse planning at th~e expense of vther needs. HOUSiA1G 1~ The twt~s~g needs debernunatian pfocess s}roedd be r~structured t~ bett~er int~egrate overal! r~gio~al and subregicsnal growth management strategies. ~n addition, the housing elerr~enf review ~ra~ess sltould pay greater attendon ta perfoeYnance and less bo prncess. T1~e st~te should de{egabe lu~using elerr~tt review and certification to the negionai ~lan~ing bvdy, iF the goir9erning bo~ard of t~e "e8~~ FE~'~8 body eleti#s tv take an such res~anse'trility. The E~IAB praposal is is1 agreernent witi~ Hue ABAG p}atfornt state~e~nt. 'I1~e City Managers Assodation is in agreerneret witE~ the ABAG pla#or~n stabe~cnectt. The City Manag~rs Associatioit is in agree~r~ent with the ABAG platform slatement.