AgdaPkt 2002-06-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

SB 910 from page 1 · · -. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · The author's staff is circulating extensive amend- lie negotiations have produced some agreement merits to the bill. it is our understanding that the among all the parties, in order for productive amendments will strike all existing provisions of the negotiations to continue, the controversial provi- bill and replace it with new comprehensive language, sions of the proposed amendments must be removed Portions of the language contain changes to the before the bill come into print. regional housing needs assessment process (EHNA), The EHNA provisions, with some minor exceptions, This issue, however, is too important for cities to represent the outcome of months of negotiations on relax. Now is the time for each city that opposed the proposed improvements to the process, However, existing version of SB 910, to immediately re-contact other sections proposed to deal with the enforce- their Assembly Members and to request that the), ment and implementation of housing elements only support a balanced and consensus solution to contain controversial provisions that have not been the outstanding issues. Phone calls and other agreed to by local government groups, personal contacts with the members of the Assem- bly Local Government Committee and the Assem- We have asked the author's staff to remove the bly Housing Committee at this time are absolutely controversial portions of their proposal before critical. Staff: Dan Carrigg; Status: Assembly Local amending the bill into print, so that the good-faith Government Committee, hearing set for June 5t'; negotiations that have been taking place since last Position: Oppose Existing Version. (Our Position year can continue, and a consensus document can be 1'o Be Eeevaluated based Upon Amendments to moved through committee. It is imperative that a Bill) consensus be reached before this bill gets out of the Assembly Local Government Committee to ensure that good faith negotiations continue as this bill moves along; otherwise, the bill must be opposed. CALL FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT PRESENTATIONS The proposed controversial amendments include (1) a provision that allows the Department of The California First Amendment Coalition Housing and Community Development (HCD) to (CFAC) has put out a call for presenters at its revoke certification of a housing element, and Open Government 2002 Conference, to be held expose the local government, at an), time, to fines, if October 17-19 at San Jose State University. a local government -- or their voters -- undertake CFAC is inviting attorneys, civic activities, an action that in the opinion of HCD nullifies the government leaders and others who are inter- effect of their housing element; (2) a provision ested in exploring current open government allowing "any interested party" to intervene in a issues "in California and beyond". court action involving a local government and HCD, and would requiring the local government to pay the "We are looking for enlightened, thought- attorneys fees for that party; and (3) an unresolved provoking presentations and discussions about legal process related to enforcement with uncapped the law and practical experiences with access fine amounts, to government meetings and information," reads the CFAC call for presentations. Inter- Assembly Members Lowenthal and Wiggins, who ested parties can find out more by contacting have been leading the working group, have made it CFAC at 916.974.8888, or their Web site at clear that they want to see a consensus document before the committee. And negotiations are continu- www.cfac.org. The deadline for presentation lng on either removing or drafting placeholder proposals is June 10. language on the outstanding issues, PAGE 4/PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site--www. cacities.org