AgdaPkt 2005-02-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

GOVERNOR'S PLAN from page 1 . . . . . . The plan, known as Governor's Reorganiza- tion Plan 1 (GRP1), was withdrawn Thursday in a one paragraph, Í\NO sentence letter to the Little Hoover Commission. The governor noted that he has .concluded that this proposal will benefit from further review" GRP 2, which proposes to reorga- nize the Department of Corrections, remains before the Little Hoover Commission and is on track to be submitted to the Legislature. GRP 1 had become a lightening rod for criti- cism from a wide range of interest groups who were critical of different aspects of the proposal. 'Maile the League did not oppose GRP 1 in its entirety, we did oppose the proposal to abolish the six-member Califomia Integrated Waste Manage- ment Board and instead turn it into a department within the California Environmental Protection AgenOJ. The word on the street in Sacramento and in the Capitol is that GRP 3 is due out within a few weeks, although the time line continues to change. GRP 3 will cover energy, resources and environ- mental quality - or more specifically, the Energy Commission and Public Utilities Commission, the Resources Agency and the California Environmen- tal Protection Agency. Next to no specific infonna- tion is available about the proposal, other than that included in the California Perfonnance Review. Unfortunately, the CPR recommendations in this area are short on details. Stay tuned. It promises to be an interesting spring and summer. CRSC from page 1 ................ In 2003, the CBSC voted in favor of adopting the NFPA 5000 Building Code. The Coordinating Council for the commission will hold a public hearing on the question in Sacramento on Tuesday, February 22. Key concerns are issues impeding the progress of adopting the NFPA 5000 Building Code, and local government issues regard- ing the recommendation of adopting the NFPA 5000 for California. During the 2003 code adoption process, the League supported the International Building Codes, produced by the International Code Council OCC). The League plans to testify at the February 22 hearing, and will once again strongly recommend that the commission adopt the International Building Codes for California. The League's Position The League believes that the process for select- ing building codes should be objective and focused upon providing the highest level of public safety in the most efficient manner possible for both the consumer and construction practitioners. The League's position is that the International Building Codes best achieve this goal. Additionally, there are other substantive reasons that form the basis for the League's recom- mendation: The ICC Building Code is the successor of the Uniform Building Code, which California has used since 1927. Switching to the untested National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 5000 code would cost cities hun- dreds of thousands of dollars to retrain fire and building officials, as well as architects, engineers and others complying with California fire and building requirements. Local governments will incur substantial costs in order to purchase and update the reference library required by adoption of the NFPA 5000 Building Code. The code selection and development pro- cess works best when it relies primarily upon the expertise and independence of local and state code officials to make final decisions. It is the League's view that the ICC code development process ,offers better opportu- nities for local government participation than does the NFPA 5000 code. Finally, a change to the new NFPA Model Codes would take California out of sync with suITOunding states, and most of the United States (43 states use the ICC International Building Code and 32 states use the ICC International Fire Code). An agenda for the February 22 hearing can be accessed at www.bsc.ca.oov. For more information, please contact Stephanie Davis at 916-263-0916 or steDhanie .daviS@das.ca.aov. Visit the League's Official Web Site--www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 3