We lost ground in the House yesterday with the passage of HB 6467 An Act Concerning Smart Growth and Plans of Conservation and Development. The strike all amendment to the bill did five things:
1. It defined smart growth and established smart growth principles.
2. It required that the Continuing Legislative Committee on State Planning and Development study the state plan of conservation and development including the process for adopting the state plan, incorporating smart growth into the plan, and how the smart growth principles are incorporated into the actions of state agencies.
3. It gave OPM until March 2011 to complete the next revision of the state plan.
4. It required the next revision of the state plan be consistent with the Climate Action Plan.
5. It required that the next revision of the state plan be consistent with local plans of conservation and development.
While we were actively involved in negotiating 1, in slipped 5 which takes any semblance of teeth out of the state plan.
If this bill passes in the Senate and is signed by the Governor, there will be no comprehensive state vision. Instead, the state plan will become an aggregate of 169 atomistic visions. We will not break down inter-governmental silos, we'll codify them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm going to be optimistic for a second: How can the state plan be both consistent with smart growth and the climate action plan AND be consistent with the municipal plans? The bill allows OPM to allow inconsistencies as long as they are noted and the reasons for them listed. Perhaps this an opportunity for OPM to take towns to task on some of their municipal plan decisions.
ReplyDelete