This really is not a new policy (LBJ and the Great Society). It was used in Detroit in the sixties. Read a little history on HUD, blockbusting, and cross district busing in Detroit. It worked so well, Detroit has never recovered. Baltimore and Chicago are just catching up to Detroit. The future is here.
A compilation of related California laws and selected text
AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ab_32_bill_20060927_chaptered.pdf
September 27, 2006
The state board shall ensure that the greenhouse gas emission reduction rules, regulations, programs, mechanisms, and incentives under its jurisdiction, where applicable and to the extent feasible, direct public and private investment toward the most disadvantaged communities in California and provide an opportunity for small businesses, schools, affordable housing associations, and other community institutions to participate in and benefit from statewide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
And
The advisory committee shall be comprised of representatives from communities in the state with the most significant exposure to air pollution, including, but not limited to, communities with minority populations or low-income populations, or both.
SB 375
2008
SB 375 PDF from Berkely
http://sustainablecalifornia.berkeley.edu/publications.html
California passed its landmark climate change legislation, Assembly Bill (AB) 32, in 2006, ushering in a new era in state policymaking. Faced with a challenging new environmental mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, state policymakers grappled with how to comply. One result was the passage of another piece of landmark legislation in the state – Senate Bill (SB) 375 – in 2008.
SB 375 aims to achieve greenhouse gas reductions from land use and transportation through better coordination of local and regional development plans. The law requires that regions (through regional planning organizations, in cooperation with local governments) develop “Sustainable Communities Strategies” to achieve more efficient land use and transportation by aligning some planning processes that traditionally had been disconnected. However, SB 375 does not require that local governments comply with the Sustainable Communities Strategies nor does it redirect or create new funding sources to support sustainable planning practices or projects.
Many of the recommended policy actions would work together to ensure that governments and individual consumers face prices that more accurately reflect the full social and environmental costs of development, housing, and transportation choices.
Promote the development of vibrant “transit villages” and “transit corridors.”
Many of the report’s recommendations would help enable regions and localities to develop “transit villages” and “transit corridors” as vibrant, livable neighborhoods that provide not only efficient housing and transport options, but also public amenities such as schools, libraries, and parks. Some recommended policies would provide financing options for localities to “capture value” from the potential profits that transit villages and corridors can provide. Other measures would direct more state and regional resources and regulatory relief to support transit expansion and supportive land uses.
Transportation
1. Direct state and regional transportation funds to regions, priority development areas, and localities that achieve “smart mobility” performance targets and provide transit-supportive land uses.
2. Provide greater state and regional revenue-raising authority for transportation, contingent on those funds being used for SB 375 objectives.
3. Encourage parking strategies that promote efficient use of land and transportation.
U.S. Department of Transportation
Transportation for a New Generation
Strategic Plan Fiscal years 2012-2016
http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/990_355_DOT_StrategicPlan_508lowres.pdf
Secretary Ray LaHood
Page 40
“STRATEGIES TO EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES FOR BUSINESSES IN THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR, ESPECIALLY SMALL, WOMEN-OWNED, AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES”
2012
Greenhouse Gas-Reduction Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EnvJustice/GHGInvest/
Disadvantaged communities in California are specifically targeted for investment of proceeds from the State’s cap-and-trade program. These investments are aimed at improving public health, quality of life and economic opportunity in California’s most burdened communities at the same time they’re reducing pollution that causes climate change.
Authorized by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), the cap-and-trade program is one of several strategies that California uses to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. Funds received from the program are deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and appropriated by the Legislature. They must be used for programs that further reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
In 2012, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 535 (De León) directing that, in addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, a quarter of the proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund must also go to projects that provide a benefit to disadvantaged communities. A minimum of 10 percent of the funds must be for projects located within those communities. The legislation gives the California Environmental Protection Agency responsibility for identifying those communities.
In October 2014, following a series of public workshops to gather public input, CalEPA released its list of disadvantaged communities for the purpose of SB 535. To inform its decision, CalEPA relied on the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen), a tool that assesses all census tracts in California to identify the areas disproportionately burdened by and vulnerable to multiple sources of pollution.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds are administered by state and local agencies for a variety of greenhouse-gas cutting programs, including energy efficiency, public transit, low-carbon transportation and affordable housing. Guidelines written by the Air Resources Board help these agencies develop programs that meet statutory requirements for reducing emissions while maximizing the benefits to disadvantaged communities.
SB 535 text
September 30, 2012
SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities (Map)
http://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=dae2fb1e42674c12a04a2b302a080598
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0501-0550/sb_535_bill_20120930_chaptered.html
The bill would require administering agencies to report to the Department of
Finance, and the Department of Finance to include in a specified
report to the Legislature, a description of how administering
agencies have fulfilled specified requirements relating to projects
providing benefits to, or located in, disadvantaged communities.
…
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
(a) California embraced the challenge posed by climate change with
the passage of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,
enacted as Chapter 488 of the Statutes of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32).
Assembly Bill 32 recognizes the disproportionate impacts climate
change will have on disadvantaged and low-income communities in
California, which already face disproportionate impacts from
substandard air quality in the form of higher rates of respiratory
illness, hospitalizations, and premature death.
(b) Assembly Bill 32 recognizes the potential vulnerability of
California’s low-income and disadvantaged population to efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and requires that activities taken to
comply with Assembly Bill 32 do not disproportionately impact those
communities.
…
(d) Assembly Bill 32 requires that public and private investment
be directed toward the most disadvantaged communities in California
to provide an opportunity for small businesses, schools, affordable
housing associations, and other community institutions to participate
in and benefit from statewide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
…
(g) It is the intent of the Legislature that this act continue
California’s implementation of Assembly Bill 32 by directing
resources to the state’s most impacted and disadvantaged communities
to ensure activities taken pursuant to that authority will provide
economic and health benefits to these communities as originally
intended.
…
39711. The California Environmental Protection Agency shall
identify disadvantaged communities for investment opportunities
related to this chapter. These communities shall be identified based
on geographic, socioeconomic, public health, and environmental hazard
criteria, and may include, but are not limited to, either of the
following:
…
(b) Areas with concentrations of people that are of low income,
high unemployment, low levels of homeownership, high rent burden,
sensitive populations, or low levels of educational attainment.
…
39713.
(a) The investment plan developed and submitted to the
Legislature, pursuant to Section 39716, shall allocate a minimum of
25 percent of the available moneys in the fund to projects that
provide benefits to communities described in Section 39711.
(b) The investment plan shall allocate a minimum of 10 percent of
the available moneys in the fund to projects located within
communities described in Section 39711.
