Yesterday, the California Air Resources Board released the long anticipated draft Scoping Plan for the Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as AB 32. The recommendations outline a plan to reduce emissions from the covered sectors by almost 30 percent from “status quo.” Perhaps most noteworthy about the proposal is the very clear embrace of a cap and trade system. The Bay Area Council began work on AB 32 two years before its eventual passage. With strong input from our Energy Committee, on June 28, 2006 the Council’s Executive Committee voted to adopt a supportive position on AB 32. We were the first major business group to step forward in this manner. Our members met with legislators, sent in notes, faxes and phone calls pushing for an appropriate version of this bill that would enable cap and trade, not heavy-handed regulation, to achieve the reduction goals. The final version of the bill allowed cap and trade, but didn’t require it. There has been heated debate ever since, and CARB’s support of cap and trade is a big step. AB 32 will have profound effects on all Bay Area Council members, and, frankly, all of us as individuals. The time to shape the plan is now, as the final Scoping Plan will be done in October. Our next Energy Committee meeting on July 9th is fully committed to this issue and all members are invited. We will have the following guests: Darren Bouton, Deputy Cabinet Secretary to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Kevin Kennedy, an architect of the new program from CARB, and Jean Roggenkamp, from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Please click here for the agenda and meeting details. RSVP to email@example.com.
By Matt Regan
Now that the election waters have cleared somewhat and we’ve had a couple of weeks to digest the results, it is clear that the big winner on June 3rd was housing. In San Francisco the Bay Area Council took strong positions in support of Proposition G and in opposition to Proposition F. These competing measures were a thumbs up or down referendum on Lennar’s plan to redevelop Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. Fortunately the voters were not hoodwinked by an attempt to impose an impossible standard that 50% of all units developed be below market rate, and they very much liked what they saw from Lennar.
In Napa Measure N, a restrictive no growth proposition opposed by the Bay Area Council, was also defeated by the voters.
Both these results give great encouragement to those of us who have been advocating for regional smart growth principles and sustainable development.
Today the Bay Area Council Transportation Committee submitted recommendations to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for their T2035 Plan. To see our recommendations, click here.
The Chair of the Council’s Education Committee wrote an op ed published in the San Francisco Examiner about education reform that is being fired around the state’s education community like a rubber pinball. It is well worth the read… Click Here
By Matt Regan
On Friday April 4, Bay Area Council member Hanson Bridgett LLP hosted the latest “Leadership Forum Luncheon” with guest of honor the incoming Pro Tem of the California State Senate Senator Darrell Steinberg. Also in attendance were fellow Hanson Bridgett Alumni, former Congressman Doug Bosco, and soon to be Congresswoman Jackie Speier.
Over fifty of the region’s top business leaders packed the room to hear Senator Steinberg’s vision for the future of California and the agenda items that he will be focusing on in the year ahead. His twin messages of increased funding for education and in particular rolling back the state’s terrible rates of High School drop outs and an increased focus on regionalism were music to the ears of the audience.
Thanks to Andrew Giacomini, Hanson Bridgett ,and Senator Darrell Steinberg for helping put together another great event. The next Leadership Forum lunch is in the pipeline, watch this space.
Today, we released the biannual Bay Area Economic Profile, which analyzes the Bay Area’s changing economy and benchmarks its performance against other major metropolitan centers. This year’s report, Sustaining the Bay Area’s Competitiveness in a Globalizing World, shifts from a national to a global scan – comparing the Bay Area with international as well as U.S. cities such as Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv, Stockholm, Shanghai, Singapore and others. We offer profound thanks to McKinsey & Company who contributed thousands of free hours of labor to make the report possible.
We are wrapping-up our search for the next class of Bay Area Council Scholars – the application deadline is today – Click here to learn more about the program
By Matt Regan
After many years and many millions of dollars invested in a proposed development that would have brought up to 25,000 new housing units and as many as 50,000 jobs to the Coyote Valley in the South Bay, a consortium of developers and landowners have decided that enough is enough.
Economic and political realities are to blame for the demise of the ambitious plan to develop a large parcel of land to the west of Highway 101 on the southern boundary of San Jose. The development team have lately been fighting an uphill battle in San Jose City Hall to win support for the project with the majority of Council members nervous about the impact costs of so many new residents in need of city services. Mayor Reed has also voiced these concerns and stipulated that at least 5000 jobs be in place before the first homes are built. This, twinned with the downturn in the housing market, appeared to be the last straw for Coyote Valley.
What is next for the site remains to be seen.
By Michael Cunningham
A coalition the Council has helped lead headed to Sacramento today to support our efforts to win billions for goods movement infrastructure – trucks, railroads, cargo ships, airports, etc. Looks good for the Northern California Coalition proposal; CTC staff recommend all projects for funding (except acquiring ACE right of way). The Council has been working on this issue for two-years now. Given the comments we heard from all parties in Northern and Southern California, it looks like we are on track for a positive outcome on April 9/10 when the Commission acts on staff recommendations
You can read the CTC staff recommendation here:
By Jim Wunderman
I had the honor of meeting today with the Governor and regional representatives from across the state to discuss long-stalled projects that could happen, if the state allowed what are called public private partnerships. They asked the Council to think out of the box for some ideas. Here’s what I presented:
Truck climbing lanes on the 580 Altamont Corridor
The Bay Area enjoys the distinction of having the 2nd worst traffic congestion in the United States. Over the past 15 years, as warehousing and logistics companies have moved out to the Central Valley and the Port of Oakland has expanded, the 580 freeway has become a parking lot of trucks and cars, truly the worst of the worst. Getting trucks off the road could improve safety, traffic congestion, the speed of goods delivery to other parts of the state and country, and air quality. It could be paid for with tolls or fees on private goods movement companies, Prop 1B goods movement funding, state highway funds and federal highway funds.
Fast trains between the Bay Area and Sacramento
The population centers of the Bay Area and Sacramento are rapidly and inexorably merging into one another and it has become standard for commuters to travel between them. The Capitol Corridor rail line is nearly operating at capacity and must compete with an equally increasing amount of freight. A PBI could create a standalone rapid rail line to carry passengers back and forth between the most densely populated areas of the new Northern California megaregion. It could be paid for with passenger fares, fees to rail freight companies to free up the other lines, Prop 1B public transit money, state highway funds and federal highway funds.
A Southern Crossing between the East Bay and the Peninsula
One of the biggest reasons the Bay Area is so afflicted by traffic congestion is the sheer volume of cars that attempt to squeeze onto the Bay Bridge each day, making it either the number 1 or 2 most traveled bridge in the United States, depending on the day. Senator Feinstein and the Bay Area Council have both long pushed for a new bridge to cross the Bay near the Oakland and San Francisco Airports. It would not only remove a huge bulk of traffic in the region, but could connect the regions two major international airports, allowing them to coordinate passenger and freight movement in a way never before possible. The bridge could also accommodate a BART line that would carry millions of passengers each year. Due to the coordination of the airports, the Southern Crossing might also eliminate the need to expand SFO or OAK airports and the resulting Bay fill. The project could be paid for with: tolls; BART fares; contributions from the airports or airlines; Prop 1B goods movement, public transit and highway funds; state highway funds; and, federal highway funds.