SB50: Some Legal Background

As Senate Bill 50 winds its way out of committee heading for a vote in the Senate the mayor of Menlo Park, Ray Mueller, who is also an attorney provided a short history of zoning law and precedent to the Daily Post this week.  I'll just trim it down to the key points here

In many ways SB50 is the history of zoning and land-use regulation come full circle and turned on its head.  In 1926, the U.S. Supreme Court, in it landmark decision Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., for the first time validated a local jurisdiction's comprehensive land-use zoning controls.  The case involved a village in Ohio, Euclid, developing local zoning ordinances in an attempt to prevent industrial Cleveland from growing into and subsuming Euclid and changing the character of the village.  In this case, the Supreme Court upheld Euclid's zoning ordinance, finding it was not an unreasonable extension of the village's police power and did not have the character of arbitrariness, and thus was not unconstitutional.  How ironic is it then, that a legislator from a big city in California drafted SB50 to use state pre-emption to forcefully impose zoning rules to push character changing density into the suburbs.

The Euclid case was the beginning of nearly a century of land-use law in the U.S. and California that was premised on the foundation that local jurisdictions were vested with the power to regulate land use within their boundaries.

For close to a century in California, when a family picked a jurisdiction in which to make the biggest financial investment in their lives, their home, it was premised on the belief that they did so in a framework of property rights vested in an expectation they would participate in a locally elected representative government that controlled the land-use destiny of that jurisdiction: from its downtown, to its parks and open space, to it schools and fire stations, to the character of the street of the home that family purchased and children played on.

Very well put, Mr. Mueller.  Our own mayor, Donna Colson, was quoted in the DJ yesterday predicting that "I think we will waste a lot of money on lawyers".  I agree.  With the wide, ugly grasp of SB50 there should be no problem coming up with a 20-city war chest to fight this as far as needed.  Would it be a waste of taxpayer money?  Sure, but it would also be necessary.  It's time to start that reserve fund in the budget.  We will have a long memory of those politicians who attempt to jam this down our throats.

Comments

[Coniq]

I went on Jerry Hill’s website and there is nothing written to I ndicate his position on SB50. I sent an email to his office saying please vote NO but I would like to know where he stands.

[Bruce Dickinson]

Yes, Joe, agree, Ms. Colson needs to choose her words a little more wisely in Bruce Dickinson's opinion. Litigation is not a "waste" of money if it's for the right cause and if it's winnable. Great to see some cities have talent that are properly and intellectually articulating the issues, so much as to cite cases back to the Supreme Court.

California is in such its own bubble/ echo-chamber and is so completely divorced from reality, that I'd like to see some of this over-reaching and excessive legislation get past the 9th Circuit and get tested in front of the SCOTUS. I bet SB50 would get blown up so fast, it would make your head spin!

[Steve K]

I just went to the Jerry Hill (I do not respect that man) web site and asked that he state his opinion on the site. And I expressed my opinion against SB50.

And taking this to the federal supreme court would be worth every penny. A much better use of funds than a new rec center.

[[email protected]]

all your comments are awesome.
Nevertheless, is there anything POSITIVE happening in 'Our Fair City?"
IE
-light bulbs
-pot hole repair
-traffic control @ BHS
-nice people
-infrastructure repair and replacement
-The City of Trees

[It Don't Come Easy]

Maybe a reserve fund can be set up similar to stopping high speed rail?

[Cathy Baylock]

Here is a Northern California group who is working to opposed SB 50: https://www.livablecalifornia.org/donate/

[Chris]

I think the new traffic circle is working well (for something positive).

I think Jerry Hill is likely to be a supporter of SB 50 because (1) it is backed by tech companies and real estate developers and (2) my guess is he has aspirations for another office (Congress when Jackie retires) and wants their support.

[[email protected]]

Come on all.
Lets take week off of "Official" City of Burlingame "Infrastructure" debates.
Lets get back to Rumors, Insults, and Passive Aggressive Responses.
RE:
Fun
Shocking
Political POV's
Poor Business Decisions
Food Critique
Last but not least,
Be Shameless.
Share your Wealth,

[[email protected]]

FYI
I have been in Malta visiting Family the last two weeks.
While listening to "Sirius/XM- Hair Nation Channel" I heard a GREAT song of yours...
"Tattooed Millionaire."

Millionaire?
Tattooed?
Or just a Rich Fu ker having a Good Life?
Do you have a WEb Site?
More Cow Bell!

[Joe]

Well, the Big Wiener of "housing" bills has been moved to the back burner for a couple of months:

SACRAMENTO — State lawmakers dealt a sharp setback Thursday to a San Francisco senator’s efforts to spur denser housing around public transit and in residential neighborhoods, shelving until 2020 a high-profile bill that would curtail local governments’ ability to block certain apartment and condominium projects.

State Sen. Scott Wiener promised to press on with his bill, SB50, after the Senate Appropriations Committee declared it would hold the measure for the rest of the year. The delay could give the Democrat more time to build support or make further changes to the deeply divisive legislation.

“It was the time to take a breath. We took a breath,” said state Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Democrat from La Cañada Flintridge (Los Angeles County), who chairs the committee. “It doesn’t mean we’re not going to focus on solving the housing crisis in California. It just means that this isn’t the right fix at this time to do that.”
____________

That does NOT mean the wiener is burnt and needs to be thrown in the trash, it just means they will let it simmer until next year. Cities should continue to build up their legal reserves and highlight the inequality of the bill. We will also take a good look at the author's inability to deliver basic services in HIS OWN district since he seems to have no respect for OTHER PEOPLE'S districts which are much better run than HIS.

[Jennifer PFaff]

'Seems like the can just got kicked down the road....

Here's a concept: The few figureheads who support SB 50 and/or similar legislation should work within their own cities and counties, if they want to get this type of zoning legislation passed for their own areas. There is absolutely nothing that prohibits them from trying. But the heavy-handed, condescending top-down politics has no place in this State.

[Peter Garrison]

Big amen!