Archived Motions

The _______________Council opposes SB828, which would allow the state to require cities approve zoning capacity for 200% of state assigned RHNA goals, and trigger a by-right process for approvals overriding all local plans IF cities fail to meet all assigned RHNA goals. WRAC notes this bill is based on arbitrary numbers, and by-right approvals with no affordable housing requirements would be a disincentive for developers to use city density bonus ordinances that produce affordable housing—and an unintended consequence of the legislation.

The _______________Council opposes SB946, in which the State of California would establish sidewalk vending regulations for local municipalities. The bill would require local regulations to permit vending in parks and public spaces and would not allow location restrictions unless “directly related to objective health, safety or welfare concerns”. The City of Los Angeles is currently analyzing sidewalk vending options. Local control and jurisdiction over sidewalk vending is strongly preferred, and should be preserved.

Immediately stay any subdivision process for NCs, including the one currently underway for Westwood NC, until BONC has had an opportunity to complete the review process, that is duly unfolding, for the subdivision ordinance (including City Council hearings that take into account community input). We further ask that BONC put in place a mechanism for professional mediation before any subdivision election is considered.

Whereas the City Charter-mandated Neighborhood Council system of Los Angeles, and the Community Councils of the City of Los Angeles, represent grass roots democracy,

1. Whereas the newly introduced California State Senate Bill 827 [Scott Weiner] as written constitutes a top down pen stroke planning measure which completely removes land use and planning authority within one half mile of high quality transit from jurisdictions and charter cities,
2. Whereas removal of said authority clearly abolishes local input into land use planning and therefore constitutes an attack upon local democracy, upon neighborhoods, and upon the Neighborhood Councils and Community Councils in the City of Los Angeles,
3. Whereas SB 827 as written trashes the density bonus and wage provisions of the JJJ TOC ordinance which were recently enacted by the people of Los Angeles—in good faith—in order to guarantee transit close housing opportunities would actually be available to working and low- income persons and families in the City of Los Angeles,
4. Whereas the lack of analysis of infrastructure and other costs associated with this pen stroke planning creates grave uncertainty that a local agency would be able to “levy enough service charges, fees or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code”,
5. Whereas, given the aforementioned lack of fiscal analysis, Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution “No reimbursement” clause is cited inappropriately in this legislation,
6. Therefore, the _____________ Council opposes SB 827 in its present form.

The ___________NC/CC requests that the City analyze the potential of overconcentration of commercial cannabis businesses in M zones, and possible loss of land for needed neighborhood services.