From: Liang C
Date: Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:12 PM
Subject: Weaken City Power - Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, "City of Cupertino Planning Dept." <planning@cupertino.org>
What
if the city defer the decision to the voters? If the city puts a
project proposal or a specific/general plan amendment on the ballot for
the voters to approve and the voters reject it, would that prevent any
developer from suing the city?
If the city were to approve/reject a project proposal or a specific/general plan amendment and a referendum is submitted to put the decision on the ballot, would that prevent any developer from suing the city for any decision made by the voters?
Thank you for clarifying these questions.
Liang C
Cupertino Resident
Date: Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:12 PM
Subject: Weaken City Power - Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, "City of Cupertino Planning Dept." <planning@cupertino.org>
Dear City Council Members and Planning Staff,
Thank you for studying the housing bills to be enacted on Jan. 1, 2018.
Could you please also look into bills that will weaken the city's ability to defend its decisions made in 2018 or later?
If a decision is made in 2017 to amend the General Plan, what such a decision easier for the city to defend than a decision delayed to 2018?
Thank you for studying the housing bills to be enacted on Jan. 1, 2018.
Could you please also look into bills that will weaken the city's ability to defend its decisions made in 2018 or later?
If a decision is made in 2017 to amend the General Plan, what such a decision easier for the city to defend than a decision delayed to 2018?
http://www.latimes.com/
The Housing Accountability Act passed in 1982 prohibits cities from saying no to housing projects that meet zoning requirements simply because they don’t like them. But such cases are hard to prove. Three measures, Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515, will beef up the existing law by making it easier for developers to prove a city acted in bad faith when denying a project, and by upping a city’s penalty to $10,000 per unit they rejected.
The Housing Accountability Act passed in 1982 prohibits cities from saying no to housing projects that meet zoning requirements simply because they don’t like them. But such cases are hard to prove. Three measures, Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515, will beef up the existing law by making it easier for developers to prove a city acted in bad faith when denying a project, and by upping a city’s penalty to $10,000 per unit they rejected.
If the city were to approve/reject a project proposal or a specific/general plan amendment and a referendum is submitted to put the decision on the ballot, would that prevent any developer from suing the city for any decision made by the voters?
Thank you for clarifying these questions.
Liang C
Cupertino Resident
No comments:
Post a Comment