Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning department lays out 2008 budget priorities; staff briefs commission on proposed ballot change to incentivize larger inclusionary units
Summary
Planning staff presented a FY2008 budget request prioritizing growth-management work, process improvements, communications and IT; staff also briefed commissioners on a proposed ballot initiative to allow density and rear-yard concessions in exchange for larger inclusionary units, and cautioned that initiatives are harder to change than code amendments.
Planning Department Director John Grama and budget lead Elaine Forbes presented the department—s proposed FY2008 budget and work program during the Feb. 14 Planning Commission meeting, outlining four priorities: a growth-management strategy and general-plan updates, process and enforcement improvements, better internal and external communications, and technology investments including GIS and an integrated permit-tracking system.
The department proposed a $24.2 million budget — roughly a 2.6% increase from the prior year — driven by wage and fringe increases, services from other departments, and a modest request for additional staffing to support process improvements and information technology. Staff noted an estimated $1.9 million shortfall in the base budget; options to close the gap included modest fee increases, changes to inclusionary-refund provisions, charging for programmatic EIR preparation, and pursuing grants and increased general-fund support.
In the Director—s report Planning staff also explained a pending ballot initiative introduced at the Board of Supervisors rules committee that would (if approved by voters) change the incentives for creating larger inclusionary affordable units: it would allow density increases, a 10-foot rear-yard bump for qualifying parcels up to 85 feet in height, and prioritized review for qualifying projects. Staff warned commissioners that local initiatives are less flexible than code amendments and could lock in planning tools citywide; the department recommended more analysis and proposed that the commission discuss the initiative in an informational session.
Commissioners asked staff for detailed breakdowns of interdepartmental charges (City Attorney, DTIS, DHR), which the department provided during the hearing. Staff said they would return to the commission with grant and fee proposals as the budget process continued through the mayor—s office and the Board of Supervisors.
Key quote: "This ballot initiative would not trigger readjustment of our projected fees," Planning staff said, adding that nexus studies and legal requirements still determine development-impact fees.
What happens next: staff will bring a budget package to the commission for its recommendation to the mayor and Board of Supervisors; the department will also schedule an informational session to discuss the ballot initiative and legal limits on staff advocacy and analysis.
