Planner says bills seeking to revamp permitting are problematic.

Urban planner Pedro Cardona Roig

By THE STAR STAFF

Legislative proposals for a new Planning and Permits Code submitted by Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz and by Gov. Jenniffer González Colón recently are “misguided bills,” urban planner Pedro Cardona Roig said.  

Of the two, Cardona Roig said in a recent radio interview (Radio Isla) that Rivera Schatz’s version of a new permitting process was better than the governor’s measure, but still bad. The island Legislature is slated to evaluate the measures today.

Regarding the governor’s proposal, the planner described it as “nonsensical and poorly crafted,” arguing that it leans in favor of the interests of large private investors rather than the needs of small and midsize businesses.

“This bill only serves large investors,” Cardona Roig said. “Small businesses and the everyday citizen who seeks stability and peace of mind in their home should be alarmed by what Governor Jenniffer González Colón and Thomas Rivera Schatz have put forward.” 

He also asserted that the governor’s proposal grants the Natural and Environmental Resources secretary unlimited authority to issue concessions that would legalize her so‑called “in-law houses” built in the seaside La Parguera community of Lajas.

Although the planner stressed that “both bills are very bad,” he noted that Rivera Schatz’s proposal has a structure that is more consistent with the organization of the government and demonstrates a far better understanding of the governmental framework than what he described as the governor’s ill-conceived plan.

Cardona Roig emphasized the need to review the island Planning Board’s role in the permitting process but disagreed with the bills’ proposals.

“There are a number of things that could be positive,” he said. “The problem is that they have failed to properly define those roles within the structure, and this will create chaos. It will affect property values and investments in Puerto Rico. Every time you tamper with these systems without reason or coherence, you risk undermining those values. The structure being proposed is, in my view, very deficient.”

The governor’s proposal appears to be problematic for autonomous municipalities, according to a review conducted by the STAR. The bill will allow towns to assume roles traditionally managed by central government agencies in land-use, zoning and construction permitting, but it would create bureaucracy by establishing municipal quasi‑judicial bodies to resolve discretionary permitting issues at the local level.

Under Chapter V, titled “Autonomous Municipalities,” the measure establishes a formal mechanism for municipalities to request the transfer of authority from the Planning and Urbanism Board, the Adjudicative Board, the Central Office of Permits (OGPe), and the Office of Citizen Complaints and Resolutions. Those transfers would encompass decisions on land use, project approvals, permitting, and related enforcement responsibilities.

The process for assuming those powers begins at the municipal level. The mayor must submit a formal petition to the municipal legislature and secure approval through an ordinance supported by at least two‑thirds of its members. That ordinance must include a detailed cost assessment covering staffing needs, technical and administrative resources, and operational capacity, as required by the Municipal Code of Puerto Rico. Once approved locally, the request is forwarded to the governor, who evaluates it based on statutory criteria. The municipality must demonstrate that the transferred authority will be exercised exclusively within its territorial limits and that it possesses sufficient technical expertise, financial resources and personnel to carry out the functions effectively.

If the governor approves the request, the transfer is formalized through a binding intergovernmental agreement between the municipality and the relevant central government agencies. The agreement may limit the scope of delegated authority depending on the municipality’s proven capacity to manage the responsibilities involved.

The framework establishes a tiered system of municipal authority consisting of three hierarchical levels, with each level granting progressively broader powers. Municipalities classified under Hierarchy I would be authorized to issue permits for existing structures, review small‑scale construction projects in urban areas, approve limited urban subdivisions, and grant certain consolidated construction permits.

Hierarchy II municipalities would have the authority to evaluate larger construction projects, approve urban developments of up to 50 lots, review zoning amendments for small parcels, adjudicate discretionary consultations, and issue signage permits, excluding those related to federally funded highways.

Hierarchy III municipalities would be granted even broader discretionary powers, including authority over zoning changes for larger parcels, variations in land use or density, industrialized construction systems with regional impact, and most signage permits, subject to specific exclusions.

Regardless of hierarchy, municipalities would be prohibited from issuing construction permits unless adequate infrastructure is available or a credible mitigation plan has been identified. Infrastructure capacity would remain a mandatory prerequisite for project approval.

Despite the expanded municipal authority, central government agencies would retain jurisdiction over projects with regional impact, developments excluded from municipal land‑use plans, major public works, and all permits and authorizations governed by federal environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and other federal environmental and waste‑management legislation.