The Monterey County General Plan says that the River Road area should remain agricultural, so any development proposal that contradicts the General Plan should be denied. State law requires local governments to make a finding that any development approval is "consistent" with the local General Plan. When a proposal isn't consistent, the right recommendation is simply to turn it down.

Monterey County doesn't have this mindset. In the case of Rancho San Juan, the biggest development project in the County's history, the County amended the General Plan repeatedly, to permit the development. They modified the General Plan to allow the development, instead of making the development follow the General Plan. They are being asked to do the same thing along River Road, and the decision is really a decision about where the "heart and soul" of Monterey County ought to be: in continued agriculture, or in providing luxury home sites for the truly rich.

River Road Ranchers for Responsible Growth is fighting hard to maintain the County's commitment to a future based on agriculture. The hearing is at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, in Salinas.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

Board of Supervisors Agenda - http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/cttb/agenda.htm

Tonight, the controversial Coast Hotel project is before the Santa Cruz City Council for what the agenda says is "deliberation and action." Public comment, in other words, is over. The Council now has an opportunity to make decisions, informed by the extensive public testimony received.

There is always a tendency to approach decisions in what might be called a "binary" manner. It's either "yes," or "no," and "don't mess with Mister In-Between." I'm kind of a "binary" guy myself, to tell the truth. Often, I've found, trying to make everybody happy in the land use decision making process can lead to the "worst" rather than the "best" of the possible alternatives. As the Lovin' Spoonful said in one of my favorite songs, sometimes you just have to "make up your mind."

All that said, let's not forget the importance of the word "deliberate." Deliberation and action are both on the Council agenda tonight. What the Council has been presented with is a pre-negotiated "deal," entered into between the City's Redevelopment staff and the hotel owners. This "deal" was made before the public had its chance to say what it thought. The deal has been presented as a "take it or leave it" proposition, but is it really? Redesigning the proposal, to respond to public concerns, is actually a possibility, and one that the Council might quite appropriately "deliberate" about before they act this evening.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

City of Santa Cruz Website
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/

Last Sunday, National Geographic aired a television special called "Killer Cats." The National Geographic has the reputation of being scientifically objective, responsible, and balanced in the way it covers the stories to which it turns its attention. Based on the promotion of the "Killer Cats" story, however, it wouldn't be unfair to propose a merger between the National Geographic and the National Enquirer. All the hysteria you've come to love in the Enquirer, but with a lot better pictures!

The "Killer Cats" show was promoted this way: "Squeezed by diminishing habitats, big cats in California and India are entering heavily populated areas to hunt. And more and more, their prey is human..." The trailer showed live footage of an incident in India in which a little girl was killed. "How do we deal with big cats when backyards become their feeding grounds?" said National Geographic. A viewer could (and perhaps was intended to) get the impression that mountain lions are natural born killers, dedicated to snatching young children from their homes and devouring them. That's not exactly the way it is. In fact, however, how we choose to grow (through compact, urban?]centered development, or through continued sprawl) will play a big role in what happens to mountain lions (and probably to some human beings, too) if we destroy the habitats that are the home of these magnificent animals.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

National Geographic Website
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/channel/explorer/

Mountain Lion Foundation
http://www.mountainlion.org/

The Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 is one of those laws that only the specialists know about, but that affects everyone. In fact, this law is the latest iteration of the state legislation that establishes Local Agency Formation Commissions (or LAFCOs) in every California County.

In Santa Cruz County, LAFCO will play a big role in deciding about the future growth of the City of Watsonville, and in Monterey County, the LAFCO will not only have a lot to say about whether Carmel Valley is allowed to incorporate, but will also decide whether Salinas, Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield, and King City will be able to pave over prime agricultural land to meet the housing demands of the Silicon Valley.

Last Monday, the Monterey County LAFCO got a status report on another issue handled by LAFCOs, the "Municipal Service Review" that ascertains what sort of services are available, and where, to serve the needs of local residents. These "Service Reviews" focus on fire protection, water supply, and sanitation services, among other things. If you're a resident of Monterey County, you don't really need to know the name of the Cortese/Knox/Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. You do need to know what LAFCO is doing about the public services you depend on. You can find out more at www.kusp.org.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

Monterey County LAFCO
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/lafco/

January 24, 2005 LAFCO Agenda
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/lafco/2005%20Agendas/
012405%20meeting/012405%20Agenda/012405%20Agenda.htm

Municipal Service Reviews
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/lafco/2005%20Agendas/
012405%20meeting/012405%20Agenda/
3.%20MSR%20status%20update.pdf

The City of Salinas, the City of Soledad, the City of Gonzales, and the City of Greenfield are all considering what is known as an "inclusionary housing" program, which requires developers to set aside a certain percentage of new development as "affordable housing," with a sales price set not by the market, but by a formula that will make that housing affordable to persons with an average or below average income. Santa Cruz County was one of the first counties in the state to implement a strong inclusionary housing program. Enacted as part of Measure J, in 1978, the Santa Cruz County program requires that at least 15% of all new housing be made permanently affordable to persons with average and below average incomes. The Santa Cruz County program has resulted in the creation of more than a thousand units of permanently affordable housing.

Earlier this week, the City Council of the City of Monterey held a study session on inclusionary housing, to consider how best to use this technique to deal with the affordable housing crisis that faces that city. In general, there are at least three major questions to be addressed in the creation and implementation of an inclusionary housing program: First, what percentage will be required? Second, will the housing be made permanently affordable, or not? Third, how will the program be administered? Over the next week or so, I'll try to provide a little "primer" on these issues, so important for the future of our communities.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

Santa Cruz County Measure J
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/publications02/
081802MeasureJstory.pdf

Nonprofit Housing Association
http://www.nonprofithousing.org/index.atomic

NPH Inclusionary Housing Campaign
http://www.nonprofithousing.org/actioncenter/
campaigns/index.atomic