Post Sustainability Institute v. ABAG (continued)
"Introduction: Respondents Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), have foisted upon nine counties and 101 cities a 'sustainable communities strategy' that will effectively replace local governmental autonomy with regional rule by unelected, unaccountable agencies, thereby upending the core principles of checks and balances upon which our republic is based. ABAG and MTC have latched onto the Legislature’s S.B. 375 greenhouse gas reduction directive as a means of imposing a radically aggressive land use ideology on Bay Area citizens."
I. Plan Bay Area is infeasible, in violation of the express SB 375 mandate…Plan Bay Area lacks substantial evidence to support the feasibility mandate.
II. Plan Bay Area impermissably exempts favored developers from the California Environmental Quality Act in violation of equal protection…Plan Bay Area itself creates for streamlined review, and not the creation of the streamlining process under S.B. 375, which Petitioners allege violates the equal protection clauses of the State and Federal Constitutions.
III. Plan Bay Area impermissably usurps local land use autonomy…ABAG and MTC have no authority to interfere with local land use decision making authority.
IV. Plan Bay Area fails to even acknowledge, let alone address, the mandates of Federal law regarding Metropolitan Planning Areas… Plan Bay Area does not even acknowledge let alone address the mandate to foster economic growth in all urbanized areas, nor does it reference the factors contained in section 134 of Title 23. On the contrary Plan Bay Area allocates over two thirds of all regional growth by 2040″ into its PDAs.
V. Growth patterns assumptions are improperly based upon racial classification…The Draft Plan’s reliance on assumptions about future housing needs are both unjustified and tinged with racism. According to the Draft Plan, future changes in the Bay Area’s demographics—primarily an increase in Hispanic and Asian households in the area—will result in an increased demand for multi-family dwellings in urban centers and a decrease in demand for single family homes in commuter neighborhoods. AR 034741-034742."
"Respondents should not be given carte blanche to transform the Bay Area’s land use and economic structure, particularly when they rely on strong arm tactics against local governments and flippant disregard for the mandates of S.B. 375.
Respondents should also be called out for their diametrically opposed representations regarding the effect of the Plan, which vary depending on the audience.
The judgment [of the Trial Court] should be reversed and the trial court directed to provide for issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate directing Respondents to rescind their approval of Plan Bay Area."
For Deeper Reading
Litigation in opposition of Plan Bay Area and other regional mandates is important. However, if you are interested in how Plan Bay Area relates to more encompassing issues, click the "Background" tab on this website's menu.