Differing Approaches to
Update: SB 1243
The regional agency merger proposal contained in Senate Bill 1243 (Torlakson) was the subject of unusual joint meetings in June and July between staff and commission members from the two affected agencies, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The sessions, facilitated by Nick Bollman of the Center for Regional Government, were focused on determining points of agreement to be included in the version of the bill which will be considered by the Assembly in August.
Several broad areas of agreement have emerged:
Agreement on the problem does not mean agreement on answers. There was considerable debate over which agency structure would be best for creating a new regional plan, whether the Smart Growth Strategy results would become the basis for a new plan, and the relationship between a regional plan and the federally mandated Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Some MTC commissioners noted that MTC has already integrated land use planning and sustainability issues into its planning process through programs such as Transportation for Livable Communities and the Housing Incentive Program, and would not find it difficult to make these part of a new regional plan. However, " there is more to comprehensive planning than transportation and housing," according to Patricia Jones of ABAG.
Some ABAG members have emphasized the importance of retaining local land-use control and using it to implement jointly agreed-upon regional goals, objectives and guidelines. While an effective regional plan cannot be achieved if local jurisdictions don't participate, local officials would prefer incentives and/or penalties over an agency with overriding authority on land use.
A critical issuelinked to whether a new agency structure is neededis the actual constitution and governance of any new or modified agency. Agency members and members of the public have spoken in favor of a governing body which has proportional representation, and some have suggested it should be directly elected rather than appointed. "All we have asked is that it should be diverse and representative of the region," says Jones.
At its July meeting, the ABAG Executive Board voted against supporting SB 1243. One week later, MTC commissioners voted to support a revised version of the bill that proposes a Regional Growth Council identical in membership to MTC, which would assume ABAG's responsibilities for land use, economic development and housing planning. It would have no control over local land use. Every six years the Council would adopt a regional growth policy plan, including an alternative growth scenario from the smart growth planning process which would be the basis for housing plans and for the RTP. The Council would send the Legislature an action plan and recommended changes in agency structure necessary to implement the regional plan. The critical arena where agreement must be achieved now becomes the Legislature, where SB 1243 will be discussed during August.
Leslie Stewart
Update: Smart Growth Strategy
The multi-agency* Smart Growth Strategy planning project (see August/September 2000 and 2001 issues) has concluded its second set of regional workshops. The first round of regional workshops resulted in three alternative growth scenarios, which included a similar number of new jobs and housing units but with different development patterns. In the recent workshops, the majority of participants chose a vision for the region which was similar to Alternative 2, the Network of Neighborhoods. They stressed "compact, walkable, mixed-use and mixed-income development in existing communities, near public transit stations, in town centers and along major corridors", according to an ABAG memo.
However, using the numerical equivalents of the planning choices made in the workshops resulted in higher numbers of new jobs and housing units than the original scenarios. With limited time and expertise, workshop participants may have been unable to carefully match the results of individual decisions to the overall growth pattern they desired. For example, although Solano County participants chose Alternative 2, with increased job growth and and an improved jobs/housing balance, the numbers showed 34,000 more jobs than envisioned in any alternative. The Regional Agencies Steering Committee will review the results of the workshops and look at recommendations for reconciling numbers with desired growth patterns at its meeting in late August. Local review of preliminary alternative projections for each area will take place in the late fall.
Eventually, each agency must also consider and adopt incentives and regulatory changes needed to implement the preferred alternative. Successful completion of the Smart Growth Strategy will require the agencies to confront and resolve issues such as those being debated in the SB 1243 discussions, i.e. regional agency authority versus local land use control, and the integration of agency functions. Another factor is the role of the private sector in accomplishing agency objectives— the Bay Area Council and Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group have participated in transportation and housing issues, and the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development is playing a key role in the Smart Growth planning process. Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network is exploring a regional governance process using broad community input and consensus.
The region is ready for change, and a vision of the goal is emerging. Next must come agreement on how to get there.
Leslie Stewart
* Regional agencies participating in the process include the Association of Bay Area Governments, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.