Half Moon Bay Mayor Thanks Appropriations Committee for Voting to Pass AB 1991
The Appropriations Committee of the California Assembly voted today to approve AB 1991, special rescue bill that, at negligible cost to the state, allows the City of Half Moon Bay to avoid an $18 million payment in settlement of a $41 million court-imposed liability, clearing the way for a floor vote by the entire Assembly. The 9-4 vote in favor of the bill was the result of bi-partisan support from committee members.
Half Moon Bay Mayor Bonnie McClung, who was one of several City officials and citizens to testify before the committee in favor of the legislation, praised the outcome of the vote. “I wish to thank the Committee for their action today, which puts Half Moon Bay one step closer to achieving the best resolution to the difficult Beachwood litigation. The 9-4 vote in favor of AB 1991 shows that the Committee understands how critical this legislation is to the future of our city. The citizens of Half Moon Bay have worked hard on a grass roots campaign to support AB 1991, and we will continue to make every effort to see that AB 1991 becomes law.”
As part of a settlement agreement entered into by the City in order to avoid bankruptcy as a result of litigation over development rights on a property known as Beachwood, Half Moon Bay is seeking special state legislation that would reinstate the subdivision plans for Beachwood and the adjoining property of Glencree, which were previously approved in 1990. The proposed legislation, AB 1991 – introduced by Assemblyman Gene Mullin – is a narrowly written “one-off” bill that permits the development of the two properties according to the pre-approved subdivision plans without setting a precedent that would undermine the Coastal Act or any other environmental legislation.
AB 1991 requires the presence of three facts unique to this situation that, in effect, combined into a perfect storm: (1) the wetland conditions on Beachwood are man-made, accidentally resulting from a City drainage project; (2) development was approved in 1990 after a review found no environmental impact; and (3) the City faced a court-imposed liability that would have bankrupted the City. The bill states that without these three facts, the bill cannot be used as precedent.