Support the CIR at the Petaluma City council

Monday, June 16th, 2008 7:00 PM

Support the Proposed Community Impact Report for Retail Development in Petaluma

Save the date: Monday, June 16th, 2008 7:00 PM

Proposed Fiscal and Community Impact Report for Petaluma

Petaluma City Council 11 English St., Petaluma

The Living Wage Coalition, Petaluma Neighborhood Association, Petaluma Community Coalition, Petaluma Independent Business Association (PIBA) and Petaluma Tomorrow have introduced a proposed Community Impact Report (CIR) requirement for new large retail developments to the City of Petaluma. The City Council will consider our CIR ordinance and discuss a staff report at this meeting. The CIR is an innovative policy tool that can help policy-makers and staff makes informed decisions on proposed large commercial retail. The CIR complements the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) by factoring in the potential impacts of proposed large retail projects on small businesses, public health and social services, job quality, and affordable housing.

Our legislation is similar to a recent state law passed in Maine, the Informed Growth Act. A CIR will encourage more sustainable and equitable development in the City of Petaluma, and can serve as a model for other cities in the county.

Please come to the City Council meeting to demonstrate your support for Community Impact Reports

To download a card in support of the CIR ordinance that can be mailed to the Petaluma City Council please click here.

________________________________________________________________________________

January 28, 2008

The Living Wage Coalition has joined with other labor, environmental, and community organizations to propose that the Petaluma City Council require a "Community Impact Report" for proposed large residential and commercial development.

Click here for the complete CIR language submitted to the Petaluma City Council

The Petaluma Community Coalition, which has introduced the CIR legislation, includes:

Petaluma Independent Business Association Sonoma County Conservation Action Petaluma Tomorrow Petaluma Federation of Teachers North Bay Labor Council New Economy, Working Solutions Accountable Development Coalition Petaluma Neighborhood Association Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County Conservation Action Fund for Education

At the January 28th meeting of the Petaluma City Council, attended by more than 100 supporters of our CIR requirement, the council unanimously gave direction to city staff to prepare a staff report and legal review of our proposed CIR ordinance.

The council also requested that our coalition work with city staff to provide more information in regards to questions raised by various council members; we will also provide the council with case studies of development projects in other California cities that were subject to a CIR requirement.

If you would like to download a model Fiscal and Community Impact Report by the Center on Policy Initiatives in San Diego for a proposed Wal-Mart please click here:

SubsidizingWalMart.pdf

See below an article about the introduction of the legislation to the city council; Also find a brief summary about what is a fiscal and community impact report and articles about a community impact report requirement passed by the Maine legislature and similar laws in other states.

____________________________________________________________________________

North Bay Bohemian

News and Features

March 5, 2008

Big-Box Bingo: Petaluma Grapples with Deciding the Entire Impact-both Fiscal and Communal-of Construction.

True Cost

Petaluma Considers Evaluating Economic Impacts

By Patricia Lynn Henley

Everyone wants to make prudent financial decisions, both individually and on a community-wide level. But what's the best way to go about it? How much do officials need to know to make a decision?

Nowadays developers expect to do an environmental impact report (EIR) for any large-scale construction project. But are physical results like noise or traffic and the ecological balance the only things decision-makers should evaluate to determine if a proposal will help or harm the local community? In Petaluma, activists are proposing requiring a community impact report

(CIR) to assess the true fiscal costs and benefits of potential projects.

Environmental impact reports have entered the standard public lexicon. Are CIRs the next step?

"Twenty-five or 30 years ago, the environmental impact report was also a new tool, and now it's standard," asserts Marty Bennett, a Santa Rosa Junior College instructor and co-chairman of the Sonoma County Living Wage Coalition, part of the group that's urging Petaluma to adopt the CIR requirement. "From my point of view, 25 years down the road, we will say that a CIR has become standard in the approval process for new developments. That will be a huge step forward."

But Petaluma resident and Sonoma County Planning Commission member Don Bennett (no relation) thinks that's a bad idea. Community impact reports, he says, would be used as "a tool to keep things from happening within the community."

He argues that the proposal is anti-chain stores and anti-big-box retailers.

"It comes down to a philosophical thing, whether you think the role of government is to control business and management, and who you're managing it for," he says. "Who's going to decide who you want in? That's the problem. Whose will do you impose?"

Cities such as Los Angeles and San Jose already require CIRs as part of the approval process for major projects. Usually less than 50 pages, a CIR looks at five main impacts: fiscal, employment, affordable housing, neighborhood needs and smart growth. Unlike an EIR, a CIR isn't binding and doesn't require mitigation of any impacts.

"For me, [a CIR] is a win-win for both sides,"

says Melissa Abercrombie of the Petaluma Neighborhood Association. "You look at the information, you weigh it and you figure out what works."

There's an urban-growth boundary to protect Petaluma against sprawl, Abercrombie points out.

"Any project that's built within that should be the best, because it's a limited amount of space."

Petaluma is already looking at plans for new Target and Lowe's stores within city limits.

Among other items, a CIR would evaluate the number and types of jobs, including salary levels, that they would bring to the area. It would look at whether they would bring new sales tax revenues to city coffers or just cannibalize the sales taxes already being collected by other, usually smaller stores.

For Abercrombie, a CIR is just a way of looking at the big picture before making a decision. It's similar to what developers do before deciding to build a project, she argues, and isn't at all anti-development. "I would welcome a development that I thought would benefit our community, and I don't think analyzing that makes it not happen."

But Don Bennett sees a CIR requirement as a "fact-finding thing to determine what you don't want in your community." The CIR proposal, he asserts, is being supported by those who don't want more chain stores in Petaluma. But if a lot of folks didn't like big-box retailers, he says, they wouldn't exist.

"If the majority of people didn't want to shop in those places, they couldn't keep their doors open."

In his view, it's more important for people to be able to shop, work and live in Petaluma. A CIR, he argues, is an attempt to have the government decide what can be built on private property based on the social aspects of the project.

But Abercrombie sees things differently.

Advertiser Links

"A CIR is just a tool so we can have a clear picture for our decision making."

The coalition presented its CIR proposal to the Petaluma City Council in late January. Coalition members are now working with city staff to answer a number of questions raised by the council members, including how much CIRs cost and how they've been implemented in other communities.

_______________________________________________________________________________

April 3, 2008

Petaluma Argus Courier

Guest Commentary

CIR Will Steer Us In Right Direction

By Paul Francis

There has been much talk centered on community impact reports these days. Some of it has been accurate, but much of it has been misreported. In most part, the opinions regarding the intentions behind the inception and implementation of this new policy/ordinance have been distorted.

One misconception in need of clarification is that the presentation of an idea like the CIR came from a political body or some other form of organized entity outside of Petaluma . In fact, the CIR requirement was part of a larger list of standards drafted by a group of Petaluma residents over a series of weekends and evenings last year to address their concerns regarding large-scale retail development in our city. This document is titled Responsible Retail Development in Petaluma . It can be viewed in complete form at www.ipetitions.com/ petition/keeppetalumaeggcentric.

Later in 2007, after seeing an array of irresponsible decisions being made by four of the seven City Council members, Petaluma residents decided they needed to do more to assure that Petaluma's elected council members heed the community's wishes in making economically prudent decisions regarding building more chain-store retail along East Washington Street and McDowell Boulevard.

In an attempt to get the City Council and staff up to speed with many other communities, similar to Petaluma, across the country that have already adopted the CIR as a method of analyzing "chain store" impacts on their local economies, the residents found it necessary to form a coalition.

By bringing together residents from various other community groups, the intent was to address a few basic fundamental concepts of the General Plan and the city doctrine that were being neglected by some of the council members.

The above-referenced Responsible Retail Development in Petaluma document was eventually formatted as a petition and circulated through Petaluma last summer. The document garnered overwhelming support and gathered some 1,700 plus signatures and continues to do so. This document, among other things, includes a CIR requirement for projects over 25,000 square feet.

Nevertheless, given the document's clarity of intent and the overwhelming support by the residents, there still lies an isolated minority that continues to oppose the CIR by fabricating fallacies to knock it. One of the fallacies that I, personally, would like to clarify is that the adoption of a CIR ordinance would somehow stop development here in Petaluma . This is a ridiculously made assumption and maliciously hypes an extreme-case scenario that simply doesn't exist here in Petaluma .

Frankly, it's insulting to put forth an idea that the residents would be so naïve to think that an economic analysis or any other development requirement would halt development in Petaluma forever. After all, why would we take the trouble to request the implementation of these basic guidelines, for development, if we wanted no development?

As the largest investors in Petaluma , we the residents want only the best possible opportunities for our community and its future. A responsible economic plan takes us past the short-term payoff of initial lump-sum development fees and perceived tax revenue and brings us closer to building a sustainable local economy that continues to fund the city for generations to come.

A community impact report ordinance will help steer us in the right direction economically while promoting the philosophy of why we live here.

( Petaluma resident Paul Francis is co-founder of the Petaluma Neighborhood Association. Contact the group at petalumaneighbors@yahoo.com ) ________________________________________________________________________________

Petaluma Argus-Courier

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Council Moves Cautiously on Impact Reports:

Officials Want to Know How Other Cities Have Implemented Rules for Fiscal 'Balance Sheet' on Big Developments

By Corey Young

A coalition of labor, environmental and neighborhood groups are urging Petaluma to become the first North Bay city to require "community impact reports" for large-scale projects. But the City Council wants to know more about how "CIRs"

work and what they cost in other communities where the studies are already required.

Council members said they want more information before deciding whether to require the reports for new subdivisions of more than 100 homes and commercial projects larger than 25,000 square feet, thresholds proposed by CIR proponents.

The reports would study the financial and social implications of a given project - such as how many jobs are created, how much sales tax would flow to city coffers and the impact on parks, schools and public safety.

The city could then use that information in deliberating on the merits of a development proposal, said Martin Bennett, co-chair of the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County, which is backing the CIR proposal. "The CIR is primarily an informational tool that can facilitate the development of a community consensus," Bennett told the council.

Such reports "offer the opportunity to showcase the benefits of good projects, as well as identify potential concerns," he said. Groups such as Petaluma Tomorrow, the Petaluma Federation of Teachers and the Petaluma Neighborhood Association have joined the Living Wage Coalition in urging the city to require CIRs.

The reports would be done early in the planning process, proponents said, to identify the impacts of a project up front. Typically less than 50 pages, they would assess five main impacts of a project - fiscal, employment, affordable housing, neighborhood needs and smart growth.

Numerous speakers urged the council to require CIRs, noting that more than 1,500 people signed petitions in favor of the reports.Many of the council's questions focused on how similar reports have been used in other cities and what it typically costs to prepare such studies.

The cost of a CIR depends on a project's size and what information is sought, said Bennett, noting that $40,000 "is probably on the high side."

Bennett said CIRs have been prepared for large stadium projects in Southern California and that the city of San Jose is requiring the reports on six large projects there.

Other communities, such as Hercules, Chico and Alameda County, have prepared CIRs for projects, said land planner Scott Stegeman, a consultant for the Living Wage Coalition. As part of crafting a CIR requirement for Petaluma, proponents will put city staffers here in touch with planners in cities where the reports have already been done, Bennett said.

There will also be meetings with local nonprofit groups and the Petaluma Area Chamber of Commerce to explain the CIR proposal - similar to the way the coalition won local support for Petaluma's living wage ordinance, he said. "We really see this as a step-by-step process, and we're still in the information-gathering stage," Bennett told the council.

The council asked city staffers to meet with CIR proponents to gather the information requested and bring it back at the first meeting in April.

(Contact Corey Young at

corey.young@arguscourier.com )

________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpted from the report the "Limits of

Prosperity: Growth, Inequality, and Poverty in the North Bay" by Nari Rhee and Dan Acland and published by New Economy, Working Solutions (NEWS). For the full report go to:

http://www.neweconomynorthbay .

What is a Community Impact Report?

When policy makers decide to invest public dollars in a development project, they usually do so in the belief that their investment will boost the local economy, enrich tax coffers and improve the local quality of life.

But these decisions sometimes backfire or have less than stellar results. A publicly-subsidized superstore, for example, may result in other stores being driven out of business, a glut of low-wage/low benefits jobs and-their counterparts-an increased demand for subsidized housing and welfare programs. Similarly, policy makers might decide to make a construction loan to developers of a sports stadium only to find, once the stadium is built, that ticket sales and sponsorships do not meet the level necessary to trigger repayment of the debt.

Several cities throughout California have begun to utilize Community Impact Reporting, a new development review tool designed to more systematically and accurately predict and measure the costs and benefits of proposed public/private partnerships and subsidies.

The need for a tool like this is particularly acute in California, where local jurisdictions are severely limited in the amount of money they can raise and must rely on sales tax dollars for most of their General Fund activities. Any project that holds the promise of generating significant sales tax dollars understandably holds a natural, and sometimes blinding, attraction for policy makers.

The Community Impact Report's organization and scope grow out of the local jurisdiction's police powers and the "right to know" precedents that began to be set in the 1980s as the public began to demand more accountability in the development process. Like an Environmental Impact Report, a CIR is an advisory document, designed to provide information but not to dictate to policy-makers.

The CIR has benefits for both developers and interested community members-providing information and a forum to citizens and alerting developers to community concerns early on in the process.

The report studies numerous areas, all in an effort to make accurate predictions about a proposed project's costs and benefits to a community.

First, is the proposed project economically viable and will it be profitable to the local community? Will the business succeed and contribute to the tax base as hoped? Will that contribution be offset by losses elsewhere?

Second, what kinds of jobs will the business create? Low wage jobs increase strain on workers and their families and, in turn, on schools and public services. When public dollars go toward subsidizing low-wage employment, it is important to measure the true costs and to note which community members and institutions will be paying those costs. Additionally, the reports asks if the project will contribute to the need for affordable housing, and at what income level the need will be most acute. This is a hugely important question in the North Bay, where exorbitant land costs contribute to the fact that most cities fail to meet even the affordable housing targets given to them by the State (targets which most experts agree are inadequate to meet housing needs). The report also looks at whether the project will create a need for additional community services and benefits-childcare, parks, road improvements-and the benefits the project will provide. CIRS also measure the Smart Growth attributes of a proposed project.

What triggers a CIR?

Different cities have different triggers. Some require a CIR for any project in a redevelopment agency; others base the requirement on project size, subsidy size or the nature and scale of the potential impacts on a community.

Who creates a CIR?

In California who prepares a CIR has varied from one city to the next. Usually a consultant chosen by a city council will prepare the CIR and typically, the developer will pay a fee based upon the square footage and the size of the project to fund a CIR. City staff review the consultant's work and may note any area of disagreement staff may have or staff may add information as needed. In some cities staff will prepare the CIR and not a consultant. In general, a CIR is relatively brief (50 pages) and takes no more than three months to complete.

How does a CIR differ from an EIR?

Environmental Impact Reports, mandated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), are concerned only with environmental impacts, not broader land use and community development policies. It does not examine the issues a CIR does-economic impacts, community services and amenities impacts, affordable housing needs, etc. The CIR functions as a companion to the EIR.

Who benefits by a CIR?

The CIR has benefits for both developers and interested community members-providing information and a forum to citizens and alerting developers to community concerns early on in the process. A CIR can also help build support for a project early in the planning process and avoid costly delays or litigation.

________________________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release: June 29, 2007

Contact: Daphne Loring, Maine Fair Trade Campaign, (207) 777-6387; Stacy Mitchell, Institute for Local Self-Reliance (207) 774-6792

Maine Enacts Landmark Law Requiring Economic Impact Studies of Big-Box Projects

Augusta, ME - Maine has become the first state in the nation to require cities and towns to evaluate the impact of big-box development proposals on jobs, local businesses, and municipal finances, and to approve only those projects that will not adversely affect the local economy.

Similar bills have been introduced in other states, including Oregon, New Jersey, and California. Last year, the California legislature approved a bill (SB 1523) requiring economic impact studies for large retail projects, but it was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

In Maine, the Informed Growth Act (LD 1810), sponsored by Rep. Chris Barstow, passed the House

86-55 and the Senate 18-17, and has been signed into law by Governor Baldacci.

"This is a tremendous victory for the people of Maine, our communities, workers, and local economies," said Daphne Loring of the Maine Fair Trade Campaign. "It gives communities a real voice in development projects and enables us to hold these national retailers accountable for a business model that often directly hurts workers, communities, and the environment."

"Too often communities must decide whether to approve big-box stores without any objective information about the impact on the local economy," said Stacy Mitchell, senior researcher with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and author of Big-Box Swindle. "Studies have found that these stores can entail significant costs in terms of job losses and local business closures.

Maine is leading the nation by giving towns a tool for weighing those costs before deciding whether to approve these stores."

The bill's passage was the result of the work of a broad coalition of over 180 small businesses, numerous municipal officials, and many labor, environmental, and community organizations. It comes on the heels of several vigorous campaigns by citizens groups to block big-box development in Maine, most notably a successful effort last year to stop a Wal-Mart supercenter in the village of Damariscotta.

Attempts by opponents, including the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, to characterize the bill as "anti-business," largely failed because of the strong support from independent business owners across the state.

Jerry Keay, owner of H.L. Keay and Son, a hardware and lumber store in Albion, lauded the bill's passage, "Small businesses are the backbone of Maine's economy. In sharp contrast to big box stores, we ensure the vitality of downtowns and strengthen our communities by keeping money in the local economy. This bill will bolster our small business sector and strengthen local economies."

The Informed Growth Act stipulates that municipalities conduct an economic impact analysis for proposed big-box retail stores larger than 75,000 square feet. The analysis is performed by an independent consultant chosen jointly by the town and the developer, and paid for by a fee charged to the developer. It evaluates the effects of the proposed store on existing businesses, jobs, wages, vacancy rates, the cost of municipal services, and the volume of "sales revenue retained and reinvested" in the community.

After the analysis is complete, the town must hold a public hearing. It is then up to town officials to evaluate the information, consider the benefits and costs, and make a determination about whether the project would create an undue adverse impact on the local economy and municipal finances. If so, the law gives the town the authority to reject the development.

The act ensures that, even in areas zoned for commercial development, citizens and local officials will always have an opportunity to evaluate big-box development and make informed decisions about whether to approve or reject such projects.

Topsham Select Board member, Michelle Jones sees the Informed Growth Act as a valuable resource, "Towns throughout Maine stand to benefit from the passage of LD 1810. The Informed Growth Act will provide an unbiased process for citizens and local officials to assess the positive and negative aspects of large-scale retail development and make responsible decisions."

About the Institute for Local Self-Reliance: ILSR is a national nonprofit organization that works to advance policies that support strong local economies and vibrant communities. More at http://www.newrules.org/

BROWSE LIVING WAGE NEWS ARTICLES