 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of June 26, 2006 to June 30, 2006
Week of June 26, 2006 to June 30, 2006
KUSP provided a brief Land Use Report on KUSP Radio from January 2003 to May 2016. Archives of past transcripts are available here.
Week of June 26, 2006 to June 30, 2006
- Monday, June 26, 2006
Senate Bill 1056: Genetically Modified Crops
- Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Cable Television And Land Use
- Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Today At The Planning Commission
- Thursday, June 29, 2006
The Padilla Argument
- Friday, June 30, 2006
Book Review: Garden Cities of To-Morrow
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP Radio by Gary A. Patton. The Wittwer & Parkin law firm is located in Santa Cruz, California, and practices environmental and governmental law. As part of its practice, the law firm files litigation and takes other action on behalf of its clients, which are typically private individuals, governmental agencies, environmental organizations, or community groups. Whenever the Land Use Report comments on an issue with which the Wittwer & Parkin law firm is involved on behalf of a client, Mr. Patton will make this relationship clear, as part of his commentary. Mr. Patton’s comments do not represent the views of Wittwer & Parkin, LLP, KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors.
| Monday, June 26, 2006 Senate Bill 1056: Genetically Modified Crops |
 |
| A week ago, I announced that the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors was going to consider an ordinance to put a moratorium on the growing of genetically modified crops. I cited this as a good example of how local governments can use their “police powers” to be innovative and creative in efforts to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The ordinance was, in fact, adopted, and the Santa Cruz Sentinel promptly said that this ordinance was a bad idea, though the Sentinel did admit that “the issue … has not been discussed enough.”
It turns out that the Sentinel is not alone in its opinion. Currently pending in the State Capitol is Senate Bill 1056, by Senator Dean Florez, who comes from the Central Valley. The bill is coauthored by Senator Jeff Denham and Assembly Member Simon Salinas, both of whom represent communities in Monterey County. SB 1056 started out as a bill to improve air quality, but has been amended into legislation that would prevent local governments from doing what Santa Cruz County has just done. This leads to another lesson about the powers of local government. The “police powers,” that allow local governments to be creative on behalf of local residents can be completely eliminated by actions of the State government. If you care about this issue, check the KUSP website. And Senators Simitian, Maldonado, and Denham need to hear from you, as do Assembly Members Salinas and Laird. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, June 27, 2006 Cable Television And Land Use |
|
|
Today, I want to highlight Assembly Bill 2987, which would cut off local control over cable television franchising. This bill is authored by the Speaker of the Assembly, Fabian Nuñez, and passed the Assembly with every member of the Assembly voting “yes.” The last major bill I can recall that got this kind of treatment was the bill that deregulated energy companies, and that isn’t exactly what I would call a great precedent. It wasn’t a pretty sight. AB 2987 eliminates local government regulation of telephone companies with respect to their delivery of cable television services. The telephone companies have spent massive amounts of money to get freedom from local regulation, because they anticipate making billions of dollars in profits, if they’re released from the kind of restrictions that local governments often impose. There is a land use angle. AB 2987 essentially says that cable services are free from regulation “along and upon any public road or highway, or along or across any of the waters or lands within the state.” The bill would essentially eliminate environmental review of any cable project, anywhere! If you’d like to let your state elected officials know what you think about this. Senators Simitian, Maldonado, and Denham will get next crack at the bill. There’s more information on the KUSP website. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, June 28, 2006 Today At The Planning Commission |
|
The Monterey County Planning Commission meets today, starting at 9:00 o’clock. As frequent listeners know, many of the most important land use decisions made by local government are made at the Planning Commission level. While the ultimate decision making authority is with the City Council or the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission often does what might be called the “heavy lifting” on important land use policy and project items. Today, the Monterey County Planning Commission is going to discuss the process it will use to review the proposed General Plan Update. This will be the fourth version of a General Plan Update prepared by Monterey County. This history of the Monterey County General Plan Update process definitely shows that the “final” decision making authority rests with the Board of Supervisors. The problem is, the Board has demonstrated that it will go to extraordinary lengths not to make a decision. Version three of the GPU got a unanimous vote of approval by the Commission, but the Board refused even to read the document, and simply told the staff and Commission to “start over.” Another year and a million dollars later, observers can only say, “well, here we go again.” There are a couple of other important, and substantive, items on the Commission’s agenda today. Click on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org to get more information, and while you’re there, please send me an email with any comments or suggestions you may have, as well. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, June 29, 2006 The Padilla Argument |
|
I was not able to attend the recent argument before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Padilla case. While this case relates directly to a school board recall election in Orange County, the land use future of Monterey County may well depend what the court decides. In Padilla, a recall petition was properly qualified for the ballot under state law, but then recall opponents filed a federal court case, claiming the petition should have been printed in both Spanish and English. A panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals initially decided this was true. A week ago, the entire Ninth Circuit court, holding an “en banc” hearing, reconsidered the case. For Monterey County, the Padilla case is important because the supposed “precedent” of Padilla has been used to prevent voters from voting on the Rancho San Juan referendum and the General Plan initiative measure. Recall petitions, and referendum petitions, and initiative petitions are actually quite different, and if all petitions have to be printed in multiple languages (sometimes up to five), the initiative and referendum powers of the people will be virtually eliminated, as a practical matter. In Monterey County, a decision upholding Padilla could mean that local voters won’t be able to give effective directions to the Board of Supervisors, which is unabashedly in favor of virtually any development, anywhere. The situation is similar in many parts of the state. You can actually listen to the Padilla argument online. I’ve put the link at www.kusp.org. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, June 30, 2006 Book Review: Garden Cities of To-Morrow |
|
|
I have a young grandchild who, at ten months of age, is just about at the walking stage. He is definitely at the crawling stage, and I have been basically pleased to note his genetic predisposition for books. In my house, books are definitely a “big deal.” Virtually every wall is covered with them, floor to ceiling, and they have been meticulously shelved according to a system I learned during my first job at the Stanford Bookstore. I am pleased that Dylan Drottar likes books! My shelving arrangements, however, do somewhat suffer from his early investigations of the written word. Awhile back, when my children disarranged my books, I had little tolerance. Grandkids are different, somehow. I don’t get nearly as riled up nowadays, when the books come tumbling down, as I used to. In fact, my grandchild just did me a great service of uncovering a book that I had assumed was lost forever, because it was misshelved, apparently, in the “fiction” section. I’m suggesting, based on my grandchild’s unerring sense for good books on planning, that you might want to uncover this book for yourself. It’s an “oldie but goodie,” Ebenezer Howard, “Garden Cities of To-Morrow,” written in 1946. This is the book that first articulated, in a clear way, the importance of “greenbelts.” Take a suggestion from Dylan Drottar, and check it out! You can get more information by clicking on the Land Use Report link on the KUSP website. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|