BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 878
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 13, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
SB 878 (DeSaulnier) - As Amended: June 4, 2012
SENATE VOTE : 27-10
SUBJECT : Regional planning: Bay Area.
SUMMARY : Requires the Joint Policy Committee, comprised of four
Bay Area regional entities, to submit reports to the Legislature
by January 31, 2014, describing policies and strategies for a
regional sustainable communities program, for the development of
a regional economic development strategy, and for public
participation in regional programs. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the Joint Policy Committee (JPC) of the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC), the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (Bay Area AQMD), the San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), and the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), to prepare a
report for submission to the Senate Committee on
Transportation and Housing and the Assembly Committees on
Transportation and Local Government on or before January 31,
2014, to address all of the following:
a) Methods and strategies for developing and promulgating a
multiagency set of policies and guidelines governing the
sustainable communities strategy required pursuant to
existing law;
b) Methods and strategies for improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of policy setting and managerial coordination
among the regional agencies constituting the joint policy
committee;
c) Methods and strategies for ensuring that the public in
the nine counties of the region has an opportunity to
comment on the proposed policies and standards that will be
SB 878
Page 2
promulgated by the joint policy committee for implementing
the sustainable communities strategies. When preparing the
strategies, there shall be included criteria to assess the
transparency in regional decision-making; and,
d) Recommendations on organizational reform to effectuate
the above requirements, including recommendations as to
whether such a regional organization shall be established
by legislation, a joint exercise of power agreement, or
some other institutional arrangement specifying the terms
of interagency collaboration that address the sustainable
communities requirements. The report should include the
criteria for selecting the recommended institutional
arrangement.
2)Requires the JPC, in developing the report, to be guided by
the following principles:
a) Increasing public access to the regional process at the
community level;
b) Respecting the integrity of the existing regional
agencies;
a) Providing policy oversight to ensure the development of
a coherent multifunctional regional plan; and,
b) Integrating regional management and reducing the
duplication of overhead functions, including, but not
limited to, human resources and procurement, in order to
achieve cost savings.
1)Requires the JPC to prepare a written 10-year regional
economic development strategy for the region for submission to
the Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing and the
Assembly Committees on Transportation and Local Government on
or before June 30, 2014, and provides that the goal of the
economic development strategy shall be to ensure that the
SB 878
Page 3
regional economy is capable of adapting to changes in
technology, market demand, and direction of the national and
international economy.
2)Requires the economic development strategy to include, but not
be limited to, all of the following:
a) The development of a socioeconomic profile of each
county;
b) Identification of the types and locations of major
clusters of firms that are both competitive and
complementary enterprises for each county;
c) Identification of the sectors of the economy where there
is underinvestment and a workforce with high unemployment
or underemployment;
d) Identification of counties or communities within
counties where investment in specific sectors of the
economy would enhance the probability of increasing the
employment opportunities for the unemployed or
underemployed;
e) Identification of the public and private investments
that are needed to facilitate the development of new, or
enhancement of existing, sectors of the regional economy;
f) Identification of institutional reforms that may be
appropriate to foster economic growth, especially in
communities with structural unemployment or
underemployment;
g) Identification of the social equity issues within the
region and the extent to which these issues may be
addressed by the economic development strategy; and,
h) A profile of the unique regional environmental amenities
as well as the social and cultural amenities that are found
to contribute to employers being attracted to and remaining
in the region.
3)Requires the JPC to adopt goals and policies related to the
inclusion of economic development opportunities in the plans
of the regional entities and in its own plans, and specifies
SB 878
Page 4
that those goals and policies shall also promote amenities
that are special to the region and contribute to the region's
quality of life.
4)Requires the JPC to appoint an advisory committee with members
from the business community, including, but not limited to,
representatives of small businesses, technology and
manufacturing sectors, community colleges, public and private
universities, labor, local governments, and other
organizations involved with the private economy, and requires
the JPC to consult with the advisory committee and coordinate
the preparation of the economic development strategy with
regional entities, private organizations and university
research institutions with specialized knowledge in economic
development.
5)Provides that the activities associated with development of
the reports must include public meetings in each of the
region's counties and provides that communication with the
public shall include the use of conventional as well as social
media.
6)Requires that member agencies of the JPC prepare a written
report identifying the public outreach and community outreach
efforts that they individually or jointly perform under
federal and state law when carrying out the respective
missions of their agencies; requires the report to identify
the criteria they use to determine the communities and groups
that will be the subject of the outreach; and, requires the
report to identify the actions and methods that the agencies
employ to ensure that policy decisions are made in a
transparent and accessible fashion.
7)Requires that the written report as specified in 8) above, to
be submitted to the Senate Committee on Transportation and
Housing and the Assembly Committees on Transportation and
Local Government on or before January 31, 2014, and can be
incorporated with the other reports mandated by the bill's
provisions.
3)Requires reimbursement to local agencies, if the Commission on
State Mandates determines that the bill's provisions contain
costs mandated by the state.
SB 878
Page 5
4)Makes other findings and declarations.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Creates a joint policy committee, consisting of ABAG, MTC,
BCDC, and the Bay Area AQMD, and includes at least one
representative from each of the nine Bay Area regional
counties, to coordinate the development and drafting of major
regional planning documents.
2)Creates MTC as a regional agency in the nine-county Bay Area
with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other
related responsibilities, including development of a regional
transportation plan with a sustainable communities strategy
3)Requires, under the provisions of SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter
728, Statutes of 2008, a regional transportation plan to
include a sustainable communities strategy designed to achieve
the targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Fund
Local mandate Unknown reimbursable
mandate General
costs, likely in the range of
$100-$300 (one-time costs)
COMMENTS :
1)ABAG was created in 1961 by cities and counties through a
joint powers agreement and serves as the region's council of
governments (COG). The Legislature created MTC in 1970 to
coordinate transportation planning in the Bay Area region (AB
363, Foran, 1970), and serves as the region's metropolitan
SB 878
Page 6
planning organization (MPO). Several other regional agencies
exist in the Bay Area as well, including the Bay Area AQMD,
formed in 1955, and the San Francisco BCDC, formed in 1965.
In October 2001, the Senate Select Committee on Bay Area
Infrastructure held a hearing to examine a possible merger of
MTC and ABAG. Witnesses said that the existing structure made
it hard to solve the Bay Area's intertwined regional problems.
Legislation was introduced to combine MTC and ABAG (SB 1243,
Torklakson, 2002), but the bill did not pass the Assembly.
In 2003, ABAG and MTC formed a "joint policy committee" to
coordinate their regional planning efforts. SB 849
(Torlakson), Chapter 791, Statutes of 2004, required the JPC
to prepare a report that analyzed the feasibility of combining
functions, declared the Legislature's intent that the Bay Area
AQMD be included on the JPC, and mandated the submittal of a
report to the Legislature by January 1, 2006. SB 849
additionally required the JPC to coordinate the development
and drafting of major policy documents prepared by ABAG, MTC
and the Bay Area AQMD including MTC's regional transportation
plan (RTP), ABAG's housing element planning process, and Bay
Area AQMD's ozone attainment plan and clean air plan.
AB 2094 (DeSaulnier), Chapter 442, Statutes of 2008, added the
San Francisco BCDC to the JPC and authorized BCDC, in
coordination with local governments, regional councils of
government, and other agencies and interested parties, to
develop regional strategies for addressing the impacts of, and
adapting to, the effects of sea level rise and other impacts
of global climate change on San Francisco Bay and affected
shoreline areas.
2)SB 375 requires a regional transportation plan to include a
sustainable communities strategy designed to achieve the
targets for greenhouse gas emission reduction. The successful
implementation of the sustainable communities strategy
requires close cooperation between regional and local
agencies. According to the author, because of the number of
regional and local agencies in the Bay Area, there is no
coordinating mechanism among the agencies necessary to achieve
the goals of SB 375.
3)This bill requires the JPC to prepare a written report for
submission to the Senate Committee on Transportation and
SB 878
Page 7
Housing and the Assembly Committees on Transportation and
Local Government, on or before January 31, 2014. The report
is required to address methods and strategies for developing
and promulgating a multiagency set of policies and guidelines
governing the sustainable communities strategy required by SB
375, methods and strategies for improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of policy setting and coordination among the
regional agencies on the JPC, methods and strategies for
ensuring that the public in the Bay Area region has an
opportunity to comment on the proposed policies and standards
for the implementation of the sustainable communities
strategy, and recommendations on organizational reform.
Additionally the bill requires the JPC, in developing the
report to be guided by specified principles, and requires
preparation of a written 10-year regional economic development
strategy, the goal of which would be to ensure that the
regional economy is capable of adapting to changes in
technology, market demand, and direction of the national and
international economy. The bill requires the appointment of
an advisory committee with specified members and requires the
JPC to consult and coordinate the preparation of the economic
development strategy with regional entities, private
organizations, and university research institutions with
specialized knowledge in economic development.
The provisions of the bill also require the activities
associated with the development of the reports by the JPC to
include public meetings in each of the region's counties.
4)According to the author, the underlying assumption in the bill
is that there is a need to change the regional structure of
governance to address the issues of regional growth and
development in a better way. The author notes that the bill
places the burden of addressing the matter of regional
governance on the Bay Area regional agencies that manage
important components of regional policymaking, and notes that
the JPC is "an obvious forum because all four agencies are
members."
This bill is author-sponsored.
5)Among the JPC's current initiatives are focused growth,
climate protection, and development of a sustainable
communities strategy pursuant to SB 375. The JPC has twenty
SB 878
Page 8
voting members - five from the Executive Board of ABAG, five
from the Bay Area AQMD, five BCDC Commissioners, and five MTC
Commissions. A representative of California's Business,
Transportation and Housing Agency is a non-voting member. The
JPC meets bi-monthly, or more often as necessary.
6)On May 18, 2012, MTC and ABAG held a joint meeting to approve
a draft long-range guide to the Bay Area's transportation,
jobs, and housing, entitled the "Preferred Land Use and
Transportation Investment Strategy." SB 375 specifically
mandated that ABAG and MTC develop a long-range plan to reduce
per-capita greenhouse gas emission from cars and light trucks.
MTC and ABAG are due to adopt the final plan and certify the
final environmental impact report (EIR) in April 2012.
SB 375 also mandated significant processes for local
government and public input into the entire process from the
Air Resources Board target-setting, to the MPOs development of
the plans to achieve them, including local elected official
workshops, a plan for general public participation to include
a broad range of stakeholder groups and workshops throughout
each region, required circulation of the draft sustainable
communities strategy or alternative planning strategy, and the
requirement to hold at least three public hearings on the
draft strategies. In light of this information, the Committee
may wish to ask the author the following questions:
a) Seeing that MTC and ABAG have been working cooperatively
to implement the requirements of SB 375 and are on track to
adopt their final plan, why is this bill necessary?
b) The JPC is already involved in the development of the
Preferred Land Use and Transportation Investment Strategy
and other issues related to SB 375 implementation. Is
there a need for further mandated duties on the JPC?
c) Given the requirements contained in SB 375 for public
outreach as ABAG and MTC develop the sustainable
communities strategy, is there a need to have additional
public outreach layered on top of the existing mandates?
7)MTC, in opposition, references a meeting held by the JPC on
May 18, 2012, in which the author asked the affected agencies
to work collaboratively on ways to improve regional governance
within the context of a set or principles distributed by the
SB 878
Page 9
author at the meeting. MTC notes that that commitment was
gladly given by all JPC members present. However, MTC writes
that this bill "was amended on June 4, 2012 absent any
consultation with the JPC or its members, and then set for
hearing before any meaningful dialogue on the amendments could
take place." MTC requests that the author return to the JPC
for further consultation and dialogue before any additional
legislation is pursued.
A letter from the JPC Chairman, Mayor Tom Bates, also
discusses the May 18, 2012 meeting and agreement of
stakeholders to hold a further dialogue on a set of
principles. The JPC notes that "it will be difficult for the
JPC to undertake the major new responsibilities called for in
SB 878 without additional financial resources, a problem which
the bill does not address." The JPC points out that it will
not be possible to consider SB 878 until they hold a public
hearing on the bill at the next meeting, which will be held
July 20, 2012.
While the Committee has heard from MTC and the JPC, other
affected agencies have yet to weigh in. The Committee may
wish to ask the other affected agencies for their perspective
on the provisions of the bill, and way wish to also ask the
following questions:
a) Has the work of the JPC up to this point had a positive
effect on overall regional coordination in the Bay Area?
b) Does the JPC have the staffing and resources to
accomplish the various reporting requirements contained in
the bill?
8)Provisions in the bill require the JPC to appoint an advisory
committee to coordinate the preparation of the economic
development strategy with regional entities, private
organizations, and university research institutions with
specialized knowledge in economic development. The advisory
committee, pursuant to the bill's provisions, is comprised of
members from the business community, including, but not
limited to, representatives of small business, technology and
manufacturing sectors, community colleges, public and private
universities, labor, local governments, and other
organizations involved with the private economy. The
Committee may wish to consider whether this makeup is
SB 878
Page 10
representative of the economic interests in the nine-county
region, and is adequately balanced. For instance, while the
provisions of the bill do not preclude other representatives
from serving on the advisory committee, it may be a good idea
to specifically include interests from agriculture,
environmental groups, and other community interest-type
groups.
9)This bill contains language that if the Commission on State
Mandates determines that the bill's provisions contain costs
mandated by the state, then reimbursement to local agencies
must be made pursuant to existing law. However, the
Commission on State Mandates in a recent decision released May
31, 2012 noted the following:
"The Commission is vested with the exclusive authority to
adjudicate disputes over the existence of state-mandated
programs within the meaning of article XIII B, section 6. The
determination whether a statute or executive order imposes a
reimbursable state-mandated program is a question of law?.
Reimbursement under article XIII B, section 6 is required only
when the local agency is subject to the tax and spend
limitations of articles XIII A and XIII B, and only when the
costs in question can be recovered solely from "proceeds of
taxes," or tax revenues."
The Committee may wish to consider whether MPOs and COGs fit
within the parameters mentioned by the Commission above.
Since MPOs and COGs generally do not get a cut of property tax
proceeds, this may disqualify them from being "eligible
claimants" for mandate reimbursement, meaning that the fiscal
costs of the new duties imposed by this bill may be borne
entirely by those agencies.
10)SB 1149 (DeSaulnier, 2012), also deals with regional
governance issues in the Bay Area. That bill would have
established the Bay Area Regional Commission (BARC), which
would have succeeded and had vested with it all the duties,
powers, purposes, responsibilities, and jurisdiction of the
JPC, as well as other additional duties, powers, purposes,
responsibilities and jurisdiction as specified in the
provisions of the bill.
SB 1149 was set to be heard in the Senate Appropriations
Committee in May, but the hearing was cancelled at the request
SB 878
Page 11
of the author.
11)Support arguments : The League of Women Voters of the Bay
Area writes that "there has been a substantially improved, and
more unified, planning program for the San Francisco Bay
region since the JPC was formed seven years ago" and supports
the goals behind the bill of coordinated, if not consolidated
regional decision-making for the Bay Area.
Opposition arguments : The California Right to Life Committee,
Inc, in opposition, writes that the language in the bill
"appears to expand the authority of regional government to
areas beyond its present scope" and that regional government
entities "are not accountable to the electorate directly."
12)This bill is double-referred to the Assembly Natural
Resources Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
League of Women Voters of the Bay Area
Opposition
California Right to Life Committee, Inc.
Department of Finance
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Individual letter (1)
Analysis Prepared by : Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958