An aerial shot over Ione shows some of the growth that has occurred in recent years. New legislation may alter future growth patterns.

Photo by: Ledger Dispatch file photo

Rural, urban, large or small, a bill signed into law this past September is set to have far-reaching impacts on the state of California and is being met with caution by some Amador officials.

The bill in question is Senate Bill 375, legislation aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions through regional land use planning reform. It's an ambitious proposal, one crafted under unique circumstances by Democratic Sen. Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento, who solicited the input of both environmental and development interests, managing something nearly unheard of in today's political climate: broad-based support.

Coupled with the landmark California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, Assembly Bill 32, which mandates a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, SB375 targets vehicle miles driven to accomplish that goal. In effect, it allows the state to offer incentives for planning "sustainable community strategies," as defined by the California Air Resources Board. In a nutshell, sustainable communities are areas that provide high-density affordable housing in close proximity to services and alternative modes of transportation.

Yet while Steinberg was able to bring environmental groups and development interests to the table, and convince an initially skeptical Gov. Schwarzenegger to sign, the bill has raised questions.

Stiffer competition for Amador?

SB375 outlines 17 metropolitan planning organizations or councils of government. That means Amador County is out of the legislative picture directly, but some neighboring communities will have to comply. Those include COGs in San Joaquin and Sacramento; the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy, Ripon, Escalon and Lathrop; and El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo and Yuba counties.

Amador officials have repeatedly expressed difficulty in getting equitable funding consideration when it comes to state allocations. The county partnered with Calaveras and Alpine to better position itself for transportation funding that went toward building bypasses on Highway 49 and in Angels Camp. For smaller communities not grouped with one of the 17 MPOs or COGs, will that make state funding even harder to secure?

"A new level of competition is now created by this law," acknowledged Charles Field, executive director of the Amador County Transportation Commission. "The closer to SB375 compliance we create our plan, the better chances we'll have for getting funded."

The transportation commission has been using two cutting-edge mapping technologies to head in the direction of regional planning, considering not only traffic models but air quality and suggested community developments.

Field added that AB32 requires the whole state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, whether they fall under Steinberg's bill or not. And the state and federal governments are increasingly considering emission-reducing strategies in funding requests.

SB375 will address regions, not individual communities, and will be given reduced emission targets by an ARB scoping plan. Those regions that meet the targets with blueprint-style plans will get a leg up on obtaining annual transportation funds. Builders will be offered density concessions and some relief from certain duplicative CEQA reviews.

"All counties have to turn in regional transportation plans that require us to indicate reduction of GHG emissions. We're not really off the hook because we're not named in the legislation," Field said.

Changing attitudes

Jim Harris, director of the Amador Air District, said the county has fallen short of federal ozone standards since 2004, much of which is due to Central Valley smog sweeping up into the foothills.

However, he was unsure legislation like SB375 will ever amount to a significant reduction in emissions, at least locally.

"It's a mental attitude that people have to achieve in this county before they start using alternative transportation," said Harris, who has spent the past three months commuting to work on an Amador Regional Transit System bus. "The maximum number of commuters (on the bus) I ever saw was five."

Often, Harris said he was the only commuter on the bus from Pioneer to Jackson.

Ted Novelli, newly appointed chairman of the board of supervisors, worried that compliance by larger surrounding communities would sap the autonomy of neighboring rural counties like Amador. "I'm afraid of the larger counties and MPOs changing our authority and rights as a rural county government," he said. "We need to take a serious look at this."

Practical applications

Local development proposals range all over the map when it comes to meeting SB375 standards. Mokelumne Bluffs and Gold Rush Ranch rank highest on considerations for reducing carbon footprints. The same isn't necessarily true for the planned Wicklow Way subdivision in Martell.

In the foothills, development location and proximity of developable land will always be the restraints. General plans that are developed with regional growth in mind will go toward meeting the state's new goals.

"The town-centered development model is a good one, and it fits SB 375's goals," said Katherine Evatt, president of the Foothill Conservancy. "It reduces greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming, and makes it possible to build workforce and affordable housing and protects working ranches and farms."

The county has pursued other emission-reducing measures, like the board of supervisors supporting a local group's inventory of major carbon dioxide sources in the county. That group is the Amador Citizens for Energy Conservation. One of its members, Marilyn Nutter, is hoping county supervisors incorporate energy efficient standards for new construction in the county's developing general plan.

However, budget shortfalls could hurt the county's efforts at compliance.

"Our feet are going to be held to the fire in meeting these new requirements," said District 2 Supervisor Richard Forster. "All requirements will be held equally - urban, suburban or rural. We need to integrate housing and transportation, but we also need to stay cognizant that the elected bodies still must make land use decision that are best for the county as a whole."

Forster and Novelli's concern was echoed by some of the groups that opposed the legislation, like the California Grocers Association and California Chamber of Commerce, both of which warned that necessary transportation projects that don't meet the new ARB goals may get derailed.

Steinberg has vowed to work with opponents on a bill that gained support from some unusual allies like the California Building Industry Association and Natural Resource Defense Council, among others.