CC MIN 01182022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Samantha Caygill, East Bay Regional Public Affairs Manager for Cal Cities, reported they are not there to advocate for or against the potential measure but rather to update them on Cal Cities' discussion with cities across the State. Jason Rhine, Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs for Cal Cities, stated Cal Cities' mission is protecting and expanding local control for cities to enhance the quality of life. He reported the Cal Cities Board in December directed staff to make a bold statement protecting local control as it relates to housing and zoning. Mr. Rhine reported they held June 2021 committee meetings to consider Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA)-7. He reported a 21-member Working Group representing all 16 regional divisions was formed between the various committees and recommended taking no position after three meetings featuring a total of seven hours of deliberation. He advised the Board later unanimously affirmed not taking a position at this time and directed staff to develop a list of strategies. Mr. Rhine reported there was unanimous support for the underlying premise of ACA 7 and the ballot measure to protect and reclaim local control. He reported many issues were identified. He listed the five greatest concerns were the possibility of pitting jurisdictions against each other, creating a disjointed patchwork approach to land use, complicating disaster and emergency management, undermining environmental justice, public health and fair housing goals, and disrupting decades of land use policy supporting and guiding local decision making. Mr. Rhine reported Cal Cities' staff will deliver its comprehensive plan to the Board in the spring featuring a menu of strategies developed in collaboration with relevant Cal Cities' policy committees and regional divisions. He forecasted a challenging year ahead where a focus on common interests will be a call for a unified voice from cities. He advised local control is the largest thing of common interest among the State's 482 cities. He commended Councilmember Testa's work on their committees. In response to Councilmember Testa, Mr. Rhine clarified there are concrete examples of the five main concerns. He advised there is ambiguity around the California Environmental. Quality Act (CEQA) and Fair Housing laws leading the working group to conclude there will be areas of uncertainty because a court will have to interpret the intent of voters. He noted the Board decided there are too many uncertainties based upon the potential actions of individual cities. Councilmember Testa reported there have been 70 laws passed over the past six years eroding local control, many of which eliminate CEQA. She advised there is already certainty around destructive laws like Senate Bill 35 which will allow an inappropriate project in Pleasanton's downtown. She explained the initiative will neutralize these laws. In response to Councilmember Testa, City Attorney Sodergren confirmed the City Council can take a position on a proposed ballot measure without it being considered an expenditure of funds for political purposes. He confirmed it is permissible for Councils to make this statement. He confirmed it is irrelevant whether the initiative is already on the ballot. In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mr. Rhine clarified the non-housing laws most directly impacted are the mandatory elements within a General Plan, such as the mandatory safety elements around disasters. He clarified the measure deals with housing and zoning but touches on a vast body of law cities must follow when making land-use decisions. He advised over the past five years the State has gotten away from having broad parameters towards micromanaging, but the issue is if a ballot measure to combat micromanaging also throws out the overarching bookend laws. He noted this is where the concept of jurisdictions being pitted against each other could come into play. He clarified Fair Housing laws appear in multiple areas, including some outside the realm of land-use laws. He advised they are intertwined, could be hard to separate, and it is unknown how the court will interpret applications. City Council Minutes Page 7 of 17 January 18,2022