|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listen to the reports each weekday at 6:49 am & 8:49 am To
suggest a topic for a future land use report, or to convey a comment,
please use this link.
|
| Past
Reports
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP by Gary Patton, General Counsel of The Planning and Conservation League. The opinions expressed by Mr. Patton are not necessarily those of KUSP Monday, December 22, 2008 – Santa Margarita Ranch One More Time Keeping you posted on the Santa Margarita Ranch project in San Luis Obispo County is virtually a full time job. This proposed development is a so-called “agricultural cluster subdivision,” affecting over 3,700 acres of agricultural land, and is very controversial. The Board of Supervisors was scheduled to take final action at its meeting last Tuesday, but after deliberating, the Board continued consideration to a meeting held last Friday. Last Friday, the Board once again continued the item, which is now scheduled to be heard tomorrow, December 23rd, just two days before Christmas. It appears that it’s the developer who is going to be getting the Christmas gift. Normally, land use matters are decided after a public hearing and the consideration of a staff report, which includes “findings and conditions.” These “findings and conditions” are legally necessary and are usually prepared by the legal and planning staff working directly for the local government. In this case, the lame duck members of the Board of Supervisors who support the project are trying to let the developer prepare his own findings and conditions. This is so contrary to good government practice that it’s obviously difficult for even the 3-2 majority that supports the project to stomach this abandonment of the public interest. You can get more information on the KUSP website. The Board meeting is tomorrow, and as I’ve now said many times, if you care, be there! For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information Tuesday, December 23, 2008 – Litigation and Land Use Today, the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors will be considering the proposed Santa Margarita Ranch project, one of the most controversial land use projects in the history of San Luis Obispo County. The 3-2 majority that supports the project includes two Supervisors who have lost their bid for reelection, and who will be replaced in January. Holding a meeting two days before Christmas, to approve the project, demonstrates the unusual nature of the majority’s commitment to it. As elected officials leave office, they often try to get in “one last lick,” to put their stamp on the future, even as they’re being replaced. A certain President of the United States comes to mind! The lame duck members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors are acting just like George Bush, and the fact that the Board majority appears ready to let the developer write his own conditions for approval shows how far from normal government practice this Board majority is apparently willing to go. Litigation often has a bad reputation, since it seems to elevate “conflict” over “compromise” and most of us do believe we ought to be able to find ways to work together, instead of fighting. This case, however, may well be one in which a lawsuit is the right remedy, if the Board persists in letting the developer determine for the County how the public interest will be defined with respect to the developer’s proposed subdivision of agricultural land. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information Wednesday, December 24, 2008 – The Viborg Mine This seems to be the “San Luis Obispo County” week on the Land Use Report. And the Board of Supervisors there may be carrying “Christmas Spirit” a bit too far, by giving away the rights of the public in connection with proposed development projects. Most notable in this regard is the Santa Margarita Ranch “agricultural cluster” subdivision, which would compromise future agricultural use on 3,700 acres of agriculturally designated land. The Board of Supervisors considered that project yesterday. The week before, the Board voted on another project I’ve highlighted on the Land Use Report, a proposed expansion of gravel mining in the Salinas River watershed. Numerous residents, local wine grape growers, and government agencies opposed the project, and the San Luis Obispo County Tribune reported the dynamics of the meeting this way: “Approval came after 9:30 p.m. and followed a 50-minute delay, as confused supervisors and county counsel sought to reconcile their own planning staff’s recommendations with those handed to them earlier by Supervisor Harry Ovitt and the developer.” Letting the developer who will be benefited by the proposed governmental action actually write the findings and conditions of approval for his project violates every good government rule. “Too often, this board takes actions that are irresponsible,” Chairman Jim Patterson said. “We know we’re headed to court.” For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information: Thursday, December 25, 2008 – The Monterey County GPU EIR Timeline Even from Biblical times (even from the very first occasion), Christmas has always been about gifts. Those Three Wise Men were “bearing gifts,” and for Christians, the greatest gift of all was delivered on that first Christmas Day by Mary. I am now getting old enough to have had a long history of participation in Christmastime gift giving (and receiving). There is a phenomenon sometimes associated with the gift giving and receiving process that you may have experienced yourself. The gift giver and the gift recipient can sometimes be on slightly different frequencies, where the specific gift delivered is concerned. The gift is well-wrapped; it’s actually a lovely gift; but it’s not the exact thing that the gift recipient really hoped for. So, the joy of getting the gift is tempered by the fact that it’s not exactly what was wanted. The more experienced you become (i.e. the older you are) the more you’re able, hopefully, not to let disappointment instead of gratitude be the primary emotion you feel, when you happen to experience this situation from the gift recipient end. Thinking about land use in Monterey County, wouldn’t we really have liked to get the gift of a good, and final, General Plan Update for Christmas? Well, many of us would have liked that, but it’s not to be. The transcript of today’s Land Use Report lets you know that a new schedule for GPU-5 is out, and that it will result in a new General Plan by next Spring. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information Review period set for EIR on plan update - http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_11260831?nclick_check=1 Friday, December 26, 2008 – Central Valley Issues Looming Large The other day, coming back from the PCL offices in Sacramento, I stopped off at Casa de Fruta, just to the West of Pacheco Pass, to meet up with land use activists from the Central Valley. Measure J, adopted by Santa Cruz County voters in June 1978, contains this simple (but quite powerful) statement: “It shall be the policy of Santa Cruz County that prime agricultural lands and lands which are economically productive when used for agriculture shall be preserved for agricultural use.” There is a period at the end of that sentence, and that simple sentence is the policy. No exceptions. No elaborations. In Santa Cruz County, land that is prime agricultural land, or that is economically productive when used for agriculture, shall be kept available for agricultural use. This is a judgment by the public about what constitutes the public interest. Note that the interest of the property owner may be different, but the public (in Santa Cruz County) has decided that the public interest in the local economy and what is now often called “food security” is more important than the profits that an individual land owner might make if he or she could convert the landowner's agricultural land to some other use. Ideas like this are starting to have more relevance in the Central Valley, so activists there are scouting around for what they can do to prevent the wholesale loss of some of the most productive agricultural land in the world. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information Measure J – (Chapter 17.01 of the Santa Cruz County Code) - http://ordlink.com/codes/santacruzco/index.htm
|