Well, what you do matters too. More on that in a minute.
Only one new minor bill out yesterday, HB407 – Short-Term Rental Enforcement Amendments. This is another marker in the increasing “clamor” from local officials to do something about regulation of short-term rentals. This one is not targeted specifically at ADUs as some of the other proposals have been, but does put language into the code specifically allowing local governments to regulate short-term rentals. The current code does not prohibit local regulation of STRs, so this bill doesn’t really seem to change anything. A couple of years ago there was a pretty concerted effort by the STR industry to get the legislature to prohibit local regulation of STRs, which as you can imagine the local governments fought pretty strongly. The compromise bill that was eventually passed just prohibits locals from using on-line advertising of STRs as the sole basis for enforcing against unauthorized STRs. This bill doesn’t really change that provision either, so I’m not sure what this bill really accomplishes. Ah, well.
Yesterday I posted about Rep. Steve Waldrip and his comments that his goal is not to have the state pre-empt local land use authority like is happening in many other states in the zoning reform wave that is sweeping around the country, but to instead find ways for the state and locals to cooperate to achieve needed changes in the land use regulation process for broader public benefit. I’ve posted on this approach previously (see January 25), supporting such an approach (which is advocated by Rep. Waldrip and League Exec Director Cam Diehl) as the best way to actually make it work. Too often, as the January 25 post demonstrates, top-down zoning reform approaches don’t work because of the lack of buy-in from local officials and citizens who then find ways to subvert them.
Today, James Brasuell, editor of the Planetizen website, shows us the “ultimate” expression of such lack of support and cooperation of top-down zoning reform – the citizen referendum. There are apparently a number of efforts now underway in California and other places by citizen groups and even local elected officials to put referenda on the ballot to overturn state legislative-adopted zoning reform measures. A couple of excerpts from Brasuell’s posting:
Enter the “Our Neighborhood Voices” ballot initiative. Instead of relying on regulatory gymnastics to circumnavigate the state’s new zoning mandates, the ballot initiative would allow local governments to simply opt out. So far, the ballot initiative is finding support from local governments and regional planning organizations alike. The city council of Chino Hills, a city located on the western edge of San Bernardino County, along the border with Los Angeles County, recently voted unanimously to support the initiative. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in January rejected a motion to stay neutral on the initiative, and instead voted, 32 to 12, to back the initiative.
While California and Oregon were the first state to risk “fed up” citizens by passing statewide zoning reforms , and are thus providing the model for how to respond to inevitable local resistance, other states legislatures, like in New York, Arizona, and Washington will this year consider legislation that would similarly preempt local zoning laws and potentially set the stage for more ballot initiative showdowns.
The collateral damage in so many political battles could be yet another step back for the legal power of the planning profession. Until the fundamentals of the market change—whether through action or inaction—power struggles and political controversies will continue. If ballot initiatives like Our Neighborhood Voices succeed, citizens, not planners, will increasingly set the policy parameters that shape the build environment of the future.
Take a look at James Brasuell’s piece, it is a most interesting lesson in how to approach policy.