HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2022 0302 CCSA REG ITEM 10ECITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of March 2, 2022
ACTION APPROVED STAFF
RECOMMENDATION, INCLUDING
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO.
2022-4079. (ROLL CALL VOTE: 4:1,
COUNCILMEMBER POLLOCK
DISSENTING).
BY A. Hurtado.
E. Consider Resolution Supporting the Brand-Huang-Mendoza Tripartisan Land Use
Initiative. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-4079 expressing
support for the Brand-Huang-Mendoza Tripartisan Land Use Initiative. (ROLL
CALL VOTE REQUIRED) (Staff: Carlene Saxton, Community Development
Director)
Item: 10.E.
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Carlene Saxton, Community Development Director
Brian Chong, Assistant to the City Manager
DATE: 03/02/2022 Regular Meeting
SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Supporting the Brand-Huang-Mendoza
Tripartisan Land Use Initiative
BACKGROUND
At its February 2, 2022 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare an agenda
item for City Council consideration regarding potentially supporting the Brand-Huang-
Mendoza Tripartisan Land Use Initiative (“Initiative”). If successful, the Initiative would
provide that city and county land use and zoning laws would override conflicting state
laws (with a few exceptions described later). The Initiative is a response to continued
efforts by the State of California to mandate one-size-fits-all approaches to land use
decisions that were historically within the purview of local governments. Some recent
examples of passed state legislation that usurped local control of zoning and land use
include:
SB 9 (2021): Required cities and counties to approve housing developments
containing two residential units and urban lot splits ministerially (over the
counter), with no discretion to reject them. The bill essentially forces the City to
approve up to four housing units on lots in single-family zones.
AB 725 (2020): Required cities to ensure that at least 25 percent of their
moderate-income housing be allocated to multi-family housing.
SB 13 (2019): For accessory dwelling units, prohibited cities from requiring
parking requirements, dwelling size limits, owner-occupancy requirements, and
from collecting certain impact fees.
SB 330 (2019): Prohibited downzoning through General Plan Amendments or
Specific Plans; prohibited design standards that increase cost; and created a
“preliminary” housing project application at which point development fees are
generally frozen for 2.5 years. Extended through 2030 by SB 8 (2021).
Item: 10.E.
182
Honorable City Council
03/02/2022 Regular Meeting
Page 2
AB 1763 (2019): For 100%-affordable projects within ½-mile of a major transit
stop, prohibited cities from establishing maximum densities.
AB 68 (2019): For accessory dwelling units, prohibited cities from establishing
minimum lot size requirements.
In addition to these measures, there are dozens of other more extreme land use and
zoning usurpation bills proposed in the State Assembly and State Senate that have
been introduced and are active in the current legislative session.
The Initiative is named for proponents Mayor Bill Brand of Redondo Beach,
Councilmember Peggy Huang of Yorba Linda, and Councilmember Jovita Mendoza of
Brentwood. The Initiative was filed with the California State Attorney General’s Office
on November 1, 2021, and proponents are currently collecting signatures to qualify it for
the November 2022 statewide election. Because the Initiative would be a Constitutional
Amendment, proponents must collect 997,139 signatures of California registered voters
(equal to 8% of the total votes cast for Governor in the last gubernatorial election) to
qualify for the ballot.
DISCUSSION
The full text of the Initiative is provided as Attachment 1, Exhibit A. A brief summary
prepared by the Attorney General of California, is provided at Attachment 2. In short,
the Initiative would provide that city and county land use zoning laws (including local
housing laws) override all conflicting state laws. If passed, the Initiative would restore
nearly all land use and zoning authority to local governments that have land use
jurisdiction over the proposed development site.
The Initiative provides three exceptions for specific topics deemed of “statewide
concern”. In these specific cases, existing state laws would continue to override local
laws:
1)The California Coastal Act of 1976;
2)The siting of power plants; and,
3)Development of water, communication, or transportation infrastructure
projects.
Further, the Initiative would prevent the state legislature and local legislative bodies
from passing laws invalidating voter-approved local land use or zoning initiatives. For
Moorpark and Ventura County, this translates to additional protection for SOAR (Save
Open Space and Agricultural Resources) initiatives passed by voters because it would
prevent the state from passing a law to invalidate them.
Finally, the Initiative would prevent the state from withholding funding to local
governments based on their implementation of the Initiative.
183