Letter: Fax Appropriations Committee chairman this weekend to vote No on AB1991

Kevin Lansing posted this letter as a comment in another topic. He’s right: It’s time to fax Mark Leno (at 916-319-2113) and let his know that not everyone on the Coastside supports AB1991.

It is critical for those opposed to AB 1991 to FAX their letters in by Monday.

The City Council’s old guard supporters and their realtor/developer friends are sending in their own letters for sure.

Below is my own letter.

via Fax: 916-319-2113
May 16, 2008

The Honorable Mark Leno
Chair, Assembly Appropriations Committee
Subject: AB 1991 (Oppose)

Dear Chair Leno and Members of the Appropriations Committee:

As a former Chair of the Half Moon Bay Planning Commission, I am writing to urge you in the strongest possible terms to vote no on AB 1991. This bill seeks to exempt the 129-house Beachwood/Glencree project from having to comply with our state’s environmental laws.

AB 1991 would establish a precedent of overriding the interests of all Californians for the benefit of a few. This bill raises important concerns about equal protection under California state law. The bill also seeks to abrogate local laws that would require the developer to provide some affordable housing.

AB 1991 would effectively approve a 129-house subdivision on the basis of a preliminary environmental review (a 1990 vesting tentative map) that is now 18 years old. An up-to-date environmental review is needed to address the growth in traffic since 1990 and the current water situation that exists on the coast. The traffic generated by this huge project would be funneled through a new signalized intersection just north of an existing subdivision, likely causing gridlock during commute hours and restricting coastal access by visitors on weekends. It is critical that a full environmental review be conducted before this project is approved. AB 1991 would bypass that review.

The Half Moon City Council is claiming that AB 1991 is necessary to avoid an $18 million settlement payment to the developer. Please note that it was the City Council itself that agreed to the $18 million payment, after doing its legally-required due diligence to ensure that payment could be made. The City Council now comes before the Assembly and asks for "legislative relief" from its own fiduciary decisions.

Most troubling, AB 1991 lays out a method by which future coastal development projects can be exempted from environmental review simply by having a local government enter into a settlement agreement with a developer and then beg the legislature for relief. What if a member of Congress proposed a bill that would exempt one financially-strapped but well-connected company (let’s call it Enron), from having to comply with the SEC’s mandatory accounting regulations? Obviously such a bill would constitute a horrible public policy precedent and should not even be considered. The same goes for AB 1991.

We all owe a tremendous debt to the state legislators who had the vision and foresight to pass the California Coastal Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, and the California Endangered Species Act. These laws protect California’s coast for the benefit of current and future generations. The stakes involved here extend beyond Half Moon Bay to all of California. To protect this legacy, I urge you and your fellow committee members to vote no on AB 1991.

Sincerely,
Kevin J. Lansing.
Half Moon Bay