|
| Beachwood legislative relief dashed By Mark Noack [ mark@hmbreview.com ] Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, September 3, 2008 1:46 PM PDT Half Moon Bay’s efforts for state legislation to relieve some of the $18 million debt to developer Charles Keenan have failed — for now, anyway — but late Tuesday city leaders vowed to continue to press into 2009 for help from Sacramento. Having invested all hope in state Sen. Leland Yee’s failed SB 863, the council now plans to find ways to hedge the loss. The council was expected to take up the issue anew at Tuesday’s regularly scheduled meeting, which occurred after the Review’s deadlines. The newspaper will break any news from the meeting at hmbreview.com. On Tuesday, the city released a statement through its lobbyist, California Strategies, saying local leaders would “begin working on compromise legislation on an urgent basis with state leaders ...” “We’re disappointed to have to wait until 2009 because this brings us closer in time to the city facing significant financial distress unless we come up with $18 million,” said Half Moon Bay Mayor Bonnie McClung in the statement. “That said, we continue to believe the state Legislature and all stakeholders understand we need some legislative solution that can satisfy all the concerns of all interested parties.” Council members say the city has been planning to apply the $5 million reimbursement from the Association of Bay Area Governments to Keenan’s payment, making the loss for the city approximately $13 million. If legislation ultimately fails, the city might make some money through limited development on the Beachwood property, although many council members have expressed skepticism of how much money such a plan could recoup. For now, council members say they are shocked by the failure of SB 863. “It’s heart-wrenching,” said Councilwoman Marina Fraser. “This whole thing has been a complete roller coaster of optimism, of hope and of disappointment,” Up until late last week, council members believed the bill had enough legislative momentum to guarantee swift passage. The city’s first attempt to gain state aid, known as AB 1991, faced intense opposition from a coalition of environmental groups. That bill, which would have dropped environmental regulation and allowed the developer to build 129 homes on the lot, never got out of the Senate. Yee’s late-session alternative for the city, SB 863, seemed to have a much stronger chance, gaining full support from many of the same opponents of AB 1991. But, by Friday, the bill still had not been given a hearing by its first policy committee, Assembly Appropriations. City Council members desperately dialed state legislators, to no avail. Jolena Voorhis, legislative director for California Housing and Community Development, says that her office and representatives of other concerned housing groups lobbied against SB 863 because of what they thought were numerous inherent problems in the legislation. Opponents of SB 863 were particularly troubled that the bill tapped $10 million in parks funds from Proposition 1C, which were designed to reward communities that provide affordable housing. “SB 863 was taking money from a bond passed by voters for affordable housing and using it for a park,” Voorhis said. “It would’ve given a lot of money to a city that hasn’t been a good actor in regard to affordable housing.” Julie Snyder, policy director of Housing California, says SB 863 was essentially an earmark designed to inappropriately take state money to bail out Half Moon Bay. The fundamental purpose of the bill made it not negotiable, she said. “I don’t see where a compromise would have been,” Snyder said. “This bill raises a fundamental question of why should Half Moon Bay get a $10 million allocation, when everyone else has to compete.” Yee’s representatives said the bill’s failure said more about the Assembly than the bill itself. “We have yet to be given a reason why this bill was not given a vote,” said Adam Keigwin, communications director for Yee. “Every bill has opposition, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t get a hearing.” Having little more than two weeks to introduce and pass a new bill didn’t help, however Keigwin said a lack of time was not the primary issue. Other bills introduced even later than SB 863 still got hearings because they were given attention, he said. “Yee is an affordable-housing advocate and he understands their perspective,” Keigwin said. “We were ready to sit down to find a resolution for this.” Although Yee did not meet with housing advocates for SB 863, Keigwin says the senator was ready to drop the amount of money taken from Proposition 1C, or to find another state fund to tap for aid. Yee’s office says that a legislative option is still available in the future, saying the senator could reintroduce the language of SB 863 when the Legislature begins next year’s session in December. Fraser says the council will have to meet to decide whether to support and potentially lobby for another bill, but she says she is now skeptical of future legislation. “I’d have to see more evidence of what we’d get out of that,” she said. “The more people who were aware of our bill, the more people were against it. If we did it again, it would have to be a different scenario to get funding.” The city now faces a June 2009 deadline to pay Keenan $18 million. The amount stems from a settlement agreement that forestalled payment of more than $40 million following a court judgment over the long-scuttled Beachwood development along Highway 1. Until then, Fraser says finding ways to finance the loss will be an ongoing project for the city. |