AgdaPkt 2002-03-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Legislative Bill Action similar exemptions. AB 2247 (Salinas}. Real Estate Signs/Public Right of Way. AB 2247 limits local government's Also, AB 2247 raises First Amendment issues. If ability to regulate the display of a sign on a public local governments permit "business" ~' speech in the right-of-way by an owner of real property, or his or public right of way, can they exclude religious or her agent, The bill permits the display of various politica'l speech? Staff: Dan Carrigg, Status: Unas- real estate signs on a public right-of-way, which are signed, Position: Oppose. located in plain view, are of reasonable dimension and design, do not adversely affect public safety or AB 1846 (Correa). Enterprise Zones. AB 1846 traffic safety as determined by the local government, extends from 15 to 20 years the designation period and advertise any of the following: for any enterprise zones that was authorized after 1990. The League supports the expansion of · That the property is for sale, lease, or ex- enterprise zones to assist city economic develop- change by the owner or his or her agent; ment. By extending the designation period of · Directions to the property; enterprise zones authorized after 1990, this bill will · The owner's or agent's name; allow affected cities with post-1990 zones to encour- · The owner's or agent's address and tole- age business participation without the concern that phone number, the enterprise zone designation will expire prema- turely. Staff: Dan Carrigg, Status: AsRevTax, Posl- The bill raises a number of issues regarding local tion: Support. control of the public right-of-way. AB 2247 appears to place the interest of the real estate industry ENVIRONMENTAL above the public's ability to control the use of its own property. League staff recently surveyed cities SB 1684 (Polanco). 'Hazardous Substances asking the following question: "To what extent has Contamination. Redevelopment. Existing law your local government had experience with real authorizes local redevelopment agencies to facilitate the clean up of toxic contaminated properties in estate signs in the public right-of-way? Do you permit them in some form in the public right-of-way? redevelopment project areas. The agency, developer Do you ban them entirely?" The majority of the and subsequent property owner receive limited cities that responded either ban signs from public immunity from further cleanup requirements if they right-of-ways entirely, or have requirements in meet specified procedures requested by the State ordinance as to how/what signs can be displayed in Department of Toxic Substances Control. This public right-of-ways, authority, which was originally enacted in 1993 and extended in 1998, is scheduled to sunset on January Another concern is a proposed double-standard. 1, 2004. Existing law only allows the placement of real estate SB 1684 removes the current sunset and extends signs on a piece of private property with the prop- erty owner's consent. This bill treats the public the authority permanently. This bill also allows a interest as secondary by limiting the public the redevelopment agency to engage in clean up activi- ability to deny signs on public property, ties outside a project area, but still within the jurisdiction of the city or county. For example, toxic Does this bill open the barn door? Who else has contamination on adjacent sites can have a chilling a business, service, or product that they want to effect on the viability of pro, oct areas. Allowing this advertise for free in a public right-of-ways? This expansion would provide potentially significant legislation is an opening for a host of special ancillary benefits to those communities and their interest groups to come to Sacramento requesting residents, which are disproportionately found in inner cities and disadvantaged neighborhoods. In a PAGE 6/PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site--www. cacities.org