DeSaulnier Introduces More Unfunded State Mandates and FAILS to Get Regressive Legislation Passed

     In February of 2013, Senator Mark DeSaulnier of Concord, introduced a bill that would require state oversight through the Governor's Office of Planning and Research in the form of a comprehensive economic analysis for any project that receives over $1 million dollars in subsidies. These infrastructure and development projects are well within the purview of cities to manage.  What DeSaulnier describes as an independent review amounts to excessive state government intrusion into land use and planning decisions made by local jurisdictions.

     On May 31, 2013, the League of California Cities announced the bills failure to pass in the Senate as a success in defending the rights of local jurisdictions to make their own economic assessments. SB673 would have increased expenses for local governments and made it more difficult for private and public sectors to work together.

SB673 Summary:

"The Permit Streamlining Act requires the lead agency that has the principal responsibility for approving a development project, as defined, to approve or disapprove the project within 60 days from the date of adoption of a negative declaration or the determination by the lead agency that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, unless the project proponent requests an extension of time.

This bill additionally would require a city, county, or city and county, including a charter city or charter city and county, prior to approving or disapproving a proposed development project that would permit the construction of a retail or other commercial facility project, as specified, to cause a cost benefit analysis to be prepared, as specified, which would be paid for by the project applicant. This bill would provide that the cost-benefit analysis would include specified assessments and projections including, among other things, an assessment of the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed development will have on the ability of the city, county, or city and county to implement the goals contained in its general plan.

This bill would specify that it would not be construed to create a private right of action in any civil litigation.

By increasing duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason."

http://www.legtrack.com/bill.html?bill=201320140SB673