AgdaPkt 2005-03-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

�'.9 - io COURT ORDERS PUBLICATION OF UPDATE ON REPAYMENT OF IMPORTANT CEQA CASE PROP 42 FUNDS On February 8,2005,the Court ofAppeal,Third Many city officials are concerned about the � Appellate District, issued its opinion in Vineyard ongoing shift of Proposition 42 transportation Area Citizens for Responsib/e Growth, Inc. v City funds to the state general fund, and when they of Rancho might see these funds restored to local transpor- Cordova. tation projects–or even possibly a repayment. The case involved the approval of a long-range Here is the status of the local share of these community plan in an area where water supplies funds: are not cuRently available. The Environmental Impact Report(EIR) analyzed a water supply plan Under current law,the suspended Proposition that proposed a combination of underground 42 amounts for FY 2003-04 and FY 2004-05 pumping from a source 5 miles away, along with ($g68 million and$1.2 billion respectively to all the construction of water facilities in connection local agencies) are to be repaid—plus interest with the Sacramento County WaterAgency. Ap- —by FY 2007-08 and FY 2008-09. (The com- proval of the plan required construction to be done bined amount for payment to cities and counties in phases with no individual tentative map app�oval for local street and road repairs is$188 million in until there was a water source sufficient to meet FY 2003-04 and$180 million in FY 2004-05. construction needs. These amounts are split between cities and counties on a 50-50 basis.) The court upheld the approval of the EIR, concluding there was a known source of water and In his proposed FY 2005-06 budget,the no reliance on illusory water allocations. Govemor has proposed to spread the repayment � of the Prop 42 loans over 15 years-WITHOUT The case provides cities with useful guidance interest. (The combined city-county share of this regarding project review under CEQA as to project deferred payment is$253 million.) Further, � applications implicating future planned water should the FY 2005-06 Prop 42 allocation be sources and tiered EIRs for the evaluation of suspended (as he proposes), the govemor project water sources.The opinion is helpful to proposes a 15 year repayment with no interest cities as they strive to apply the requirements of for that as well. the local general plan and zoning, CEQA,and sound resource management and development For a good (and much more thorough) dis- principles to proposed development projects, cussion of this issue, see the Legislative Ana- especially those involving future water sources. lysts'Office's piece on Transportation funding in On March 11,the court ordered that its opinion be the LAO Analysis of the 2005-06 Budget bill at published. www.lao.ca.QOV. The League thanks Eric Danly,City Attorney for Clear Lake and Cloverdale, and Buck Delventhal, Deputy City Attomey for San Francisco,for writing a friend-of-the-court letter in support of publication on behalf of the League. Their letter can be re- viewed at www.cacities.orq/recentfilinps. Visit the League's Official Web Site--www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 3