California Planning & Development Report has joined the electronic communications revolution. On July 1st, we delivered the first PDF of our newsletter directly to subscribers' email inboxes!

If you're not already a subscriber, now's the time to sign up. Because we have eliminated our printing and mailing costs, we've rolled our subscription price clear back to the 2000 level. That's right – you'll get an even better, more topical CP&DR at a nine-year-old price.

The future of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research appears very much in doubt. On Wednesday, the Legislature's Conference Committee on the Budget recommended eliminating OPR only hours after Gov. Schwarzenegger called OPR "a total waste."

The Los Angeles Times quotes the governor saying, "The Office of Planning and Research ought to be about planning and research to come up with great policy answers, which this office doesn't do."

The committee charged with recommending how the Air Resources Board should establish greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets under AB 32 and SB 375 spent much of its first half dozen meetings talking in about the technical details of measuring emissions and modeling for future emissions. That changed on Wednesday, June 3, when Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC) member Richard Katz said he'd had enough.

There is no better example of the conundrum in which Gov. Schwarzenegger and all Californians find ourselves than the controversial oil drilling deal off Santa Barbara County.

And away they're going.

The grandstands of Churchill Downs will probably always fill with what bourbon-soaked pundit P.J. O'Rourke described as the "tremendous squash and jostle" of seersucker suits and saturnine headwear every May. And yet, out West no fewer than four of California's once-proud of racetracks have entered some form of bankruptcy, redevelopment, or uncertainty. With attendance and handle down at California tracks – as at tracks across the country – rare opportunities are emerging to redevelop outsized parcels that sit amid heavily urbanized areas.

Opponents of the proposed construction of two houses on a coastal bluff in San Clemente may pursue their lawsuit to overturn the California Coastal Commission's approval of the projects, even though the suit was filed after a statute of limitations had ostensibly expired, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

The state will appeal a Superior Court decision blocking the state from shifting $350 million of tax increment revenue from redevelopment agencies to schools

In the midst of the state's larger budget crisis, the amount at issue in the litigation suddenly appears piddling. Still, the case, if pursued, could be important, especially to redevelopment agencies.

A state appellate court has upheld the City of Los Angeles's refusal to grant a conditional use permit for the sale and on-site consumption of alcohol at an adult cabaret. The court ruled that the decision to deny the permit strictly concerned alcohol and did not prohibit the expression of protected speech.

The Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan for Huntington Beach seeks to remake Beach and Edinger into first-rate streets. But the plan's elevation of retail sales above other needs could compromise the city's urban design goals.

These days, the California High-Speed Rail Authority might as well be called the Political Traction Company. After winning voter approval of a $9.9 billion bond in November, the authority seemed to become a favorite of the Obama administration, which is eager to fund high-speed rail construction. In addition, some Central Valley communities � such as Fresno and Bakersfield, where stations are set to be built � are eager to see the project advance. Nevertheless, cities along the Peninsula of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties are asking questions about the project.

The California Supreme Court has reversed an appellate court ruling that regional park and open-space districts said would have greatly diminished their ability to acquire and manage land. The court said that a regional park and open-space district can dispose of property if it has not officially declared – such as by adopting a resolution – that the property is "dedicated" for use as a park and open space.

In this month's roundup of land use news, both the developer of a Calaveras County golf course built without permits and the county must decide how to proceed after supervisors refused to approve the project after-the-fact; the Obama administation has reversed a controverial Bush-era Endangered Species Act rule; a conservation plan for an endangered salamander in Sonoma County has died; developer DMB Associates has announced it is abandoning a new town proposal in San Benito County but has a new 12,000-unit project in Redwood City; and a whistleblower lawsuit over redwoods logging has been settled.

Even as local officials in Southern California attack the question of how to implement SB 375, they have slyly begun to suggest that the bill isn't the best way to attack the problem it supposedly addresses – greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It is not clear what the locals will do with this line of attack, unless they are angling to try to go back to the Legislature to shift the responsibility for GHG emissions reductions away from land use and back toward technological improvements.