HomeMy WebLinkAbout072721 Packet
DANVILLE TOWN COUNCIL
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Tuesday, July 27, 2021
9:00 a.m.
TELECONFERENCE ONLY
https://us02web.zoom.us/s/87003604501
CORONAVIRUS DISEASE (COVID-19) ADVISORY
AND MEETING PROCEDURE
On March 19, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-33-20, ordering all residents
in the State of California to shelter at their place of residence, with the exception of those
who may leave to provide or receive critical services, as defined in Order N-33-20.
Under the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, public entities may utilize
teleconferencing for public meetings, as a precaution to protect the health and safety of
staff, officials, and the general public. Members will be participating via teleconference.
As such, there will be no physical location for members of the public to participate in this
meeting.
The Town of Danville encourages citizens to participate in public meetings. Members of
the public can watch or listen to meetings via the web-video communication platform
Zoom. Agendas are posted on the Town website: https://www.danville.ca.gov/agendas
Public comments may be provided in one of two ways:
Zoom – verbal comments: To provide live comments during the meeting, join the
meeting at the scheduled time via the Zoom link on the agenda. When the agenda item
is opened to public comment, click on the "Raise Your Hand" option in Zoom. Your name
will be announced, and you will have up to 3 minutes to share your comments.
Email - written comments: To provide written comments, send an email to the Assistant
to the Town Manager dfriedmann@danville.ca.gov prior to 4:00 p.m. on July 26, the day
before the meeting. Correspondence should include the meeting date and agenda item
number. All comments received prior to the deadline will be provided to the members
in advance of the meeting. Written comments will not be read into the record.
If you have questions, contact Diane Friedmann, Assistant to the Town Manager, at 925-
314-3378 or dfriedmann@danville.ca.gov prior to the meeting.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5BF2FC3C-ABD5-4BF6-AB45-348A3056A730
July 27, 2021
Page 2
To view or participate in this meeting:
Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/s/87003604501
Webinar ID: 870 0360 4501
For audio access to the meeting by telephone, use dial-in information below:
US: (669)900-6833 or (346)248-7799 or (253)215-8782 or (312)626-6799 or (929)205-6099 or
(301)715-8592
Please note that telephone access to the meeting is recommended for audio only. To supplement
a PC, Mac, tablet or device without audio, you may also join by phone at the telephone numbers
listed above.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENT – To address the Committee about a subject which is not listed on
the agenda, click on the “Raise your Hand” option in Zoom. Your name will be announced
and you will have up to three (3) minutes to share your comments.
3. ACTION ITEMS – To address the Committee on an Action item, click on the “Raise Your
Hand” option in Zoom. Your name will be announced and you will have up to three (3)
minutes to share your comments.
3.1 - July Legislative Report
4. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing agenda was posted at the Danville Town Offices and
the Danville website at www.danville.ca.gov, in the Town of Danville 72 hours in
advance.
___________________________________
Marie Sunseri, City Clerk
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Town of Danville will provide special assistance for
disabled citizens. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (925)
314-3388. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5BF2FC3C-ABD5-4BF6-AB45-348A3056A730
LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM 3.1
TO: Mayor and Town Council July 27, 2021
SUBJECT: July Legislative Report
BACKGROUND
Both individually and as part of the Tri-Valley Cities coalition, Danville officials are
adapting to the social and economic changes and 2021 state legislative priorities.
Advocacy work has been focused on supporting legislative efforts that help the Town
recover from the COVID-19 pandemic while limiting new legislation that impacts local
control.
The State Legislature is currently on summer recess. The Legislature will reconvene on
August 16, which marks the final six weeks of the 2021 Legislative session. August 27 is
the last day for bills to move out of the appropriations committee and September 10
marks the last day for bills to move out of the legislative session. The Town continues to
track and advocate on bills related to housing, sales and taxation, public safety and
mental health, environment, and transportation.
DISCUSSION
Housing production remains a top priority of the legislature, which is focused on
attempting to create affordability by imposing new requirements on local governments.
To meet an estimated housing need of 1.8 million new homes by 2025, the state will need
to significantly outperform current production, estimated at 80,000 new homes annually,
according to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Many
of these bills will impact Danville’s ability to plan for housing development as we have
in the past. Designed to supersede local zoning, these bills create housing density,
streamline the approval process for housing developments, and create density infill by
eliminating single family zoning.
The Town continues to monitor state housing legislation, including the bills within Senate
Pro Tem Toni Atkins, “Building Opportunities for All” housing package. The following
bills in this package continue to move forward in the legislative process;
July Legislative Committee Report 2 July 27, 2021
SB 6: (Caballero): The Neighborhood Homes Act (Oppose)
Senate Bill 6 the Neighborhood Homes Act authorizes residential development on
existing lots currently zoned for commercial office and retail space, such as strip malls or
large “big box” retail spaces, that are not adjacent to industrial use zones. The bill would
require the density for a housing development under these provisions to meet or exceed
densities deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households,
including a minimum density of at least 20 du/ac for a suburban jurisdiction and 30
du/ac for an urban jurisdiction. This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
Senate Bill 7: (Atkins) The Housing + Jobs Expansion and Extension Act (Watch)
This bill Reenacts and revises the expedited California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) administrative and judicial review procedures established by the Jobs and
Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act, AB 900. Extends
eligibility to housing projects that will result in a minimum investment of $15 million, but
less than $100 million, provided at least 15% of the project is affordable to lower income
households and the project is not used as a short-term rental. Urgency clause adopted
and enrolled and presented to the Governor for signature on May 13. Chaptered by
the Secretary of State on May 20.
Senate Bill 8: (Skinner): Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Oppose)
Senate Bill 8 extends SB 330 the Housing Crisis Act from expiration in 2025 to 2030.
Aimed at streamlining the production of housing, the bill freezes development related
fees upon builder’s submission of a preliminary application, sets a cap on the number of
public hearings for a development and prohibits local agencies from any actions that
would reduce housing capacity. This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
Senate Bill 9: (Atkins) California Housing Opportunity & More Efficiency Act
(Oppose)
SB 9 would allow for ministerial approval of a proposed housing development containing
2 residential units within a single-family residential zone if the proposed development
meets certain requirements are met. Townsend Public Affairs participated in the public
comment to voice the Tri-Valley Cities opposition to the bill during the June 9 Assembly
Local Government Committee. This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
Senate Bill 10: (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Housing Development: Density
(Oppose)
SB 10 authorizes a city to pass an ordinance to zone any parcel for up to 10 units of
residential density if parcel is in a transit rich area, jobs rich area or urban infill site. This
bill removes the ability of voters to pass a ballot initiative to override these decisions.
July Legislative Committee Report 3 July 27, 2021
This bill has been amended to reflect the following changes;
a) Removes the ability to pass such an ordinance if the voter initiative designates
publicly owned land for open space, park or recreational purposes; and
b) Amendments override any provisions of the planned development documents
including covenants and CC&R’s.
c) Requires a 2/3 vote, instead of a simple majority of local elected officials to pass
such ordinances.
This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
SB 15: (Portantino) Housing development: incentives: rezoning idle retail sites
(Support)
SB 15, upon appropriation by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act or other statute,
would require the department of HCD to administer a program to provide incentives in
the form of grants allocated as provided to local governments that rezone idle site s used
for a big box retailer or a commercial shopping center to instead allow the development
of workforce housing. This bill is now a 2-year bill.
AB 215: (Chiu) Housing Element: regional housing need: relative progress
determination (Oppose)
This bill, starting with the 6th housing element revision, would require the department
to determine the relative progress toward meeting regional housing needs of each
jurisdiction and council of governments, as specified. The bill would require the
department to make this determination based on the information contained in the annual
reports submitted by each jurisdiction, as specified. The bill would require the
department to make this determination for all housing and for lower income housing by
dividing the applicable entity’s progress toward meeting its share of the regional housing
need by its prorated share of the regional housing need, as specified. This bill is currently
in the Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 602: (Grayson) Development fees: impact fee nexus study (Oppose)
AB 602 requires that impact fee nexus studies must: a) Identify the existing level of service
and the proposed new level of service and explain why the new level of service is
appropriate; b) Include information in the nexus study that supports the local agency's
actions establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee; 2) Requires HCD to create an impact
fee nexus study template and authorize local jurisdictions to use the template.
This bill is currently in Senate Appropriations Committee.
AB 989: (Gabriel) Housing Accountability Act: appeals: Office of Housing Appeals
The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or
conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, specified housing
development projects, including projects for very low, low-, or moderate-income
households and projects for emergency shelters that comply with applicable, objective
general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the
July Legislative Committee Report 4 July 27, 2021
application for the project is deemed complete, unless the local agency makes specified
written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. This bill would,
until January 1, 2029, establish an Office of Housing Appeals (office) within the
department, to review housing development projects that are alleged to have been denied
or subject to conditions in violation of the Housing Accountability Act. This bill is
currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Sales and Taxation
SB 792: (Glazer) Sales and use tax: returns: online transactions: local jurisdiction
schedule (Support)
Bill 792, whose annual sales of tangible personal property transacted online exceeded $1
million in the previous calendar year to track and report to CDTFA the city or ZIP code
where the purchaser resides for each sale within the state that is transacted online. This
is a critical first step in the process of online sales tax reform, which will shine light on a
major and growing problem in California local finance. This bill is also in the suspense
file in appropriations. SB 792 was amended at the request of the California Department
of Taxation and Fee Administration. Instead of the zip code they requested the city or
county. This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Public Safety and Mental Health
AB 43: (Friedman) Traffic Safety
authorizes CalTrans and local authorities, on streets where a 65-mph limit is applicable,
to lower the speed limit to as low as 15 mph pursuant to an engineering traffic study.
AB 988: (Bauer-Kahan) Mental Health: Mobile crisis support teams: 988 crisis hotline
(Support)
Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer Kahan's bill that would require the Office of Emergency
Services to take actions to implement the hotline system, designating a 988 -crisis hotline
center or centers to provide crisis intervention services and crisis care coordination to
individuals accessing the 988 hotline. The bill is waiting to be referred to committee and
there are ongoing discussions and negotiations about the actual bill language with
telecoms and stakeholders. An Urgency bill requires a 2/3 vote instead of a simple
majority.
Environment
SB 612: (Portantino) Electrical Corporations and other load-serving entities: allocation
of legacy resources (Support)
This bill would require the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to recognize
the value of GHG-free energy in legacy contracts and would increase transparency
around how investor-owned utilities renegotiate these contracts. This bill would ensure
fair and equal access to benefits of the resources that all customers continue to pay as they
transition to a CCA from an investor-owned utility. The customer continues to pay for
resources that have been procured on their behalf through the power charge indifference
July Legislative Committee Report 5 July 27, 2021
adjustment and receive no benefit from these resources. This bill is now a 2-year bill.
SB 619: (Laird) Organic Waste Reduction regulations (Support)
This bill would require the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery until
January 1, 2023, to only impose a penalty on a local jurisdiction, and would require a
penalty to only accrue, for violation of the regulations if the local jurisdiction did not
make a reasonable effort, as determined by the department, to comply with organic
landfill reduction goals under SB 1383. This bill is currently in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 843: (Aguiar-Curry) California Renewable Portfolio Standard Program: renewable
feed in-tariff: Bioenergy Market Adjusting Tariff program: community choice
aggregators. (Support)
This bill would allow Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) to access BioMAT
program, an existing state program that supports the development of renewable
bioenergy electricity projects. Bioenergy is generated from organic waste and helps
divert waste from landfills. This bill is currently in the Senate Appropriations
Committee.
Transportation
SB 548: (Bauer-Kahan) Tri-Valley Regional Rail Authority: transit connectivity
(Support)
SB 548 would expressly require the Tri-Valley-San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail
Authority to be considered a rail transit district, thereby exempting the authority from
specified provisions related to regulation by counties and cities regarding building,
zoning, and related matters. This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
Public Utilities
SB 556: (Dodd) Street light poles, traffic signal poles: small wireless facilities
attachments (Oppose)
This measure requires local governments to make space available to telecommunications
providers without recognizing local authority to manage the public right -of-way
preserved in federal law. FCC regulations explicitly enable local governments to ensure
that such installations meet appearance and design standards, maintain traffic safety,
protect historical resources' integrity, and safeguard citizens' quality of life. To protect
the public's investment, the control of the public rights-of-way must remain local. This
bill is in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Tri-Valley Cities Coalition
The Tri-Valley Cities coalition of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon and the
Town of Danville in partnership with our lobbyist, Townsend Public Affairs (TPA), has
been actively involved in advocating for local control on housing legislatio n. Advocacy
July Legislative Committee Report 6 July 27, 2021
efforts include:
a) TPA testifying on behalf of the Tri-Valley Cities coalition in policy and fiscal
committee hearings.
b) Meeting with Assembly Local Government Committee staff members to discuss
the bills.
c) Meeting with Tri-Valley Cities Mayors and Managers and Assembly Committee
Chair Aguiar-Curry to discuss housing legislation.
d) Submission of letters to each Local Government Committee Assemblymember
from the TVC coalition.
e) Submission of letters of opposition to the Legislature and the League of California
Cities.
f) Partnering with Senator Glazer and Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer Kahan’s
staff to communicate the TVC position on housing legislation.
g) Preparing documentation for Legislative Audit Committee request to audit
Department of Housing and Community Development state mandated Regional
Housing Needs Assessment for the 6th cycle of the housing element.
h) Tri-Valley Cities coalition meeting on July 28 featuring a presentation from the
California Department of Housing and Community Development on RHNA
In addition, the Tri-Valley Cities coalition in partnership with TPA, is compiling
Legislative voting results on SB 1120 in the 2020 session and SB 9 in the current session
to determine an SB 9 “floor vote” strategy over the last 6 weeks of the legislative term.
Federal
The Town’s earmark requests for the Traffic Signal Modernization Project the Iron Horse
Trail Pedestrian Improvements have been submitted in the Transportation and Housing
and Urban Development bill. The first committee markup of this bill is July 12. Final
resolution of these requests is scheduled to occur in the fall.
Redistricting
Every 10 years, after the federal government publishes updated census information,
California must redraw the boundaries of its Congressional, State Senate, State Assembly
and State Board of Equalization districts, so that the districts correctly reflect the state’s
population. California voters authorized the creation of the Commission when they
passed the VOTERS FIRST Act (Act) in 2008. It authorized the Commission to draw the
new district lines. In 2010, the Congressional Voters FIRST Act added the responsibility
of drawing Congressional districts to the Commission. Census data is expected to the
commission from September 30 to October 31.
July Legislative Committee Report 7 July 27, 2021
Prepared by:
Diane Friedmann
Assistant to the Town Manager
Reviewed by:
Joseph Calabrigo
Town Manager
Attachments: A – League of Ca. Cities DRAFT Letter of Opposition AB 989
B - Tesla Park Budget Trailer Bill DRAFT Letter of Support
C – Assembly Bill 1512 DRAFT Letter of Support
D – AB 43 DRAFT Letter of Support
April 21, 2021
The Honorable Jesse Gabriel
Assembly Member, California State Assembly
State Capitol, Room 4117
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Assembly Bill 989 (Gabriel) Appeals. Housing Accountability Committee.
No tice of Opposition (As Amended 03/25/2021)
Dear Assembly Member Gabriel:
On behalf of the League of California Cities (Cal Cities), the California State Association of
Counties (CSAC), the Urban Counties of California (UCC), and the Rural County
Representatives of California (RCRC), we must strongly oppose your Assembly Bill 989
(Gabriel), which would create a new state appeals committee within the California Department
of Housing and Community Development (HCD), comprised of five members, all appointed by
the Governor.
Housing affordability and homelessness are among the most critical issues facing California
cities and counties. Affordably priced homes are out of reach for many people and housing is
not being built fast enough to meet the current or projected needs of people living in the state.
Cities and counties lay the groundwork for housing production by planning and zoning in their
communities based on extensive public input and engagement, state housing laws, and the
needs of the building industry. Importantly, local jurisdictions must also approve housing
projects that are consistent with local zoning and design standards.
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) allows a city or county – after proper notice and public
hearings within strict time limits - to impose conditions to mitigate the environmental impact of
the project under CEQA (Section 65589.5(o)(2)(E); and to require compliance with “objective,
quantifiable, written development standards, conditions and polici es” in effect when the
preliminary application was submitted (Section 65589.5(f )). AB 989 allows a single hearing
officer to overturn either of these actions if a developer argues they make the project “infeasible”
following procedures that are not subjec t to public review and comment.
The HAA allows a city or county – after proper notice and public hearings within strict time limits
- to deny a project because it would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or
safety (Section 65589.5(j)). As with the provision noted above, AB 989 allows a single hearing
officer to substitute their judgment about the public health or sa fety of a community and overturn
the denial following procedures that are not subject to public review and comment.
By so doing, AB 989 overrides these specific provisions of the HAA.
We are cognizant of the time it takes to resolve a dispute through the courts. The HAA
addresses this issue in Section 65589.5(m) and (n). Adding a hearing by the Executive Branch
of the State Government to the process of resolving the dispute will not get housing built faster.
In fact, doing so will only slow development , increasing conflict and add time to the process. AB
989 will do nothing to bridge the gap between the time a city or county approves a housing
project and when a developer actually begins construction .
ATTACHMENT A
For these reasons, Cal Cities, CSAC, UCC, and RCRC, strongly opposes AB 989. If you have
any questions, please contact me at (916) 658 -8264.
Sincerely,
Jason Rhine Christopher Lee
League of California Cities California State Association of Counties
Jean Kinney Hurst Tracy Rhine
Urban Counties of California Rural County Representatives of California
cc: The Honorable Cecelia Aguiar-Curry, Chair, Assembly Local Government Committee
Members, Assembly Local Government Committee
Consultant, Assembly Local Government Committee
Consultant, Assembly Republican Caucus
Tri-Valley Cities
DANVILLE • DUBLIN • LIVERMORE • PLEASANTON • SAN RAMON
July 22, 2021
The Honorable Toni Atkins
Pro Tem California State Senate
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Nancy Skinner
Chair, Senate Budget Committee
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Bob Wieckowski
Chair, Senate Subcommittee Natural Resources
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Henry Stern
Chair, Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Anthony Rendon
Speaker, California Assembly
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Philip Ting
Chair, Assembly Budget Committee
State Capitol, Sacramento, CA
The Honorable Richard Bloom
Chair, Assembly Subcommittee Natural
Resources
Senate Capitol, Sacramento, CA
Dear Legislative Leaders:
On behalf of the Tri-Valley Cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon and the Town of
Danville, we write to respectfully request the Tesla Park trailer bill language be included in the
final Natural Resources Budget Trailer Bill passed by the Legislature. The language will
designate the Tesla Park land for conservation purposes, including non-motorized recreation
and provide $9 million to State Parks Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division.
Local funds are available for this purpose through the Altamont Landfill Open Space (ALOS)
Committee in Alameda County.
We respectfully urge you to support including the Tesla Park preservation language in the
Natural Resources budget trailer, to permanently preserve the approximate 3,100-acre Tesla
Park land in eastern Alameda County as a non-motorized nature and cultural preserve, and
transfer $9 Million to State Parks Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Division. The local Altamont
Landfill Open Space (ALOS) Committee in Alameda County has committed to providing the
funds.
The reasons to permanently preserve the 3,100 acre Tesla Park land (Alameda-Tesla
expansion area) in eastern Alameda County as a non-motorized nature and cultural preserve
are numerous and irrefutable. Tesla Park is the exemplar model of a biologically diverse,
culturally significant intact native landscape. The State at every level has a duty to protect this
land as a public trust and legacy for future generations.
As top UC professors have stated, allowing Tesla Park to be converted to motorized
recreation, would be “one of the worst public land stewardship decisions that could be
made in California in terms of biodiversity and public health.”
Tesla Park is a biodiversity hotspot. Tesla Park has a multitude of threatened, endangered and
special status plants and wildlife, and sensitive vegetation habitats. Tesla Park is the choke
ATTACHMENT B
point of a critical linkage habitat corridor connecting Mount Diablo and northern Diablo Range
which would be cut off if opened to OHV recreation. A recent study by UC Berkeley scientists
identified the northern Diablo Range area where Tesla Park is located as a top conservation
priority area for the entire state given climate change impacts on species and habitats.
Permanent preservation of Tesla Park with no motorized recreation is a top conservation priority
for our region. In addition to local governments and officials - renowned university professors
and scientists, Native American leaders, ranchers, conservation and preservation groups, and
the overwhelming majority of the community, have long said that Tesla Park must be protected
given its extraordinary natural and cultural resource values.
Local agencies have local mitigation funds available through the Altamont Landfill Open
Space (ALOS) Committee and ALOS Fund to pay State Parks and the OHMVR Division to
permanently preserve Tesla Park. This can be accomplished through a permanent
conservation easement with the Tesla Park land remaining state park land or purchase
by a local conservation or park agency, as the State determines.
The recent court ruling in favor of the County of Alameda striking down the most recent
environmental impact report and general plan attempt by the State Parks Off Highway Motor
Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division to obtain CEQA approval to open Tesla Park to off-
highway vehicle recreation provides the opportunity to finally resolve this 20-plus year
controversy. Now the State and the County, cities within the County and local agencies must
work together to permanently preserve all of Tesla Park for conservation purposes.
Working with agencies to redesignate Tesla Park for conservation and non-motorized recreation
is the “Win-Win”. It supports objectives to preserve 30% of state lands to advance biodiversity
protection by 2030. It achieves policy goals to protect exceptional natural resources vital for
providing climate change resiliency and to fight climate change by reducing air pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions. It resolves a longstanding controversy that wastes public funds. It
increases access to nature for the largest segment of the population, including underserved
urban youth, while protecting nature. It provides funds to the State Parks Department and
OHMVR Division to use in other areas that are suitable for damaging OHV recreation.
We request that you support the legislative efforts presented by Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan
and Senator Glazer by including Tesla Park language in the final Natural Resources Budget
Trailer Bill passed by the Legislature. Thank you for your help to ensure this critical conservation
priority for our region and the State is finally achieved.
Sincerely,
cc: Assembly Member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
Senator Steve Glazer
July 22, 2021
The Honorable Anthony J. Portantino
Chair, Senate Appropriations Committee
State Capitol, Room 2206
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: AB 1512 (Bauer Kahan) Off-highway vehicular recreation: Carnegie State Vehicular
Recreation Area: Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area
Letter of Support from the Tri-Valley Cities
Dear Chair Portantino:
On behalf of the Tri-Valley Cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon and the Town of
Danville, we write to state our strong support for AB 1512 (Bauer-Kahan) which will permanently
preserve the approximate 3,100-acre Tesla Park land in eastern Alameda County as a non-
motorized nature and cultural preserve, and transfer $9 Million to State Parks Off-Highway Motor
Vehicle Division. Local funds are available for this purpose through the Altamont Landfill Open
Space (ALOS) Committee in Alameda County.
The reasons to permanently preserve the 3,100 acre Tesla Park land (Alameda-Tesla expansion
area) in eastern Alameda County as a non-motorized nature and cultural preserve are numerous
and irrefutable. Tesla Park is the exemplar model of a biologically diverse, culturally significant
intact native landscape. The State at every level has a duty to protect this land as a public trust
and legacy for future generations.
As top UC professors have stated, allowing Tesla Park to be converted to motorized
recreation, would be “one of the worst public land stewardship decisions that could be
made in California in terms of biodiversity and public health.”
Tesla Park is a biodiversity hotspot. Tesla Park has a multitude of threatened, endangered and
special status plants and wildlife, and sensitive vegetation habitats. Tesla Park is the choke point
of a critical linkage habitat corridor connecting Mount Diablo and northern Diablo Range which
would be cut off if opened to OHV recreation. A recent study by UC Berkeley scientists identified
the northern Diablo Range area where Tesla Park is located as a top conservation priority area
for the entire state given climate change impacts on species and habitats.
Permanent preservation of Tesla Park with no motorized recreation is a top conservation priority
for our region. In addition to local governments and officials - renowned university professors and
scientists, Native American leaders, ranchers, conservation and preservation groups, and the
overwhelming majority of the community, have long said that Tesla Park must be protected given
its extraordinary natural and cultural resource values.
Local agencies have local mitigation funds available through the Altamont Landfill Open
Space (ALOS) Committee and ALOS Fund to pay State Parks and the OHMVR Division to
permanently preserve Tesla Park. This can be accomplished through a permanent
conservation easement with the Tesla Park land remaining state park land or purchase by
a local conservation or park agency, as the State determines.
ATTACHMENT C
Tri-Valley Cities
DANVILLE • DUBLIN • LIVERMORE • PLEASANTON • SAN RAMON
July 21, 2021
The Honorable Laura Friedman
California State Assembly
State Capitol, Room 6011
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: Assembly Bill 43 (Friedman) Traffic Safety
Letter of Support from the City of Fremont
Dear Assemblymember Friedman,
On behalf of the Tri-Valley Cities coalition, which includes the Cities of Dublin, Livermore,
Pleasanton, San Ramon, and the Town of Danville, we write in strong support of Assembly Bill
43, your measure which grants Caltrans and local authorities greater flexibility in setting speed
limits based on recommendations from the Zero Traffic Fatality Task Force, made in January
2020.
We are concerned about the growing traffic safety issues in the Tri-Valley region and the state.
Vehicular crashes remain a serious and growing threat to public safety, and this legislative effort
is especially relevant as we have made strides to encourage residents to bike and walk more,
through developments such as pedestrian safety road improvements. This bill would provide
flexibility to our respective cities to set speed limits below 25 miles per hour (mph) in school
zones, near senior centers, and along active business districts. Also, other speed limits could
be lowered by 5 to 10 mph if warranted by safety considerations.
As you know, the speed that a vehicle travels can significantly increase the likelihood of death
from a traffic crash. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a person
struck by a vehicle going 20 mph has a 10% chance of dying. That number goes up to 40% for
vehicles going 30 mph, and 80% for vehicles going 40 mph.
This is a bill that could saves lives- so we thank you for your work on this critical policy topic and
are pleased to support Assembly Bill 43.
Sincerely,
ATTACHMENT D
The recent court ruling in favor of the County of Alameda striking down the most recent
environmental impact report and general plan attempt by the State Parks Off Highway Motor
Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division to obtain CEQA approval to open Tesla Park to off-highway
vehicle recreation provides the opportunity to finally resolve this 20-plus year controversy. Now
the State and the County, cities within the County and local agencies must work together to
permanently preserve all of Tesla Park for conservation purposes.
Working with agencies to redesignate Tesla Park for conservation and non-motorized recreation
is the “Win-Win”. It supports objectives to preserve 30% of state lands to advance biodiversity
protection by 2030. It achieves policy goals to protect exceptional natural resources vital for
providing climate change resiliency and to fight climate change by reducing air pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions. It resolves a longstanding controversy that wastes public funds. It
increases access to nature for the largest segment of the population, including underserved urban
youth, while protecting nature. It provides funds to the State Parks Department and OHMVR
Division to use in other areas that are suitable for damaging OHV recreation.
We restate our strong support for AB 1512, and the legislative efforts presented by Assembly
Member Rebecca Bauer Kahan and Senator Steve Glazer to ensure Tesla Park, a critical
conservation priority for our region and the State, is finally achieved.
Sincerely,