In Monterey County, Federal District Judge James Ware has suspended the operation of the referendum and initiative powers of the people, pending a Ninth Circuit Decision in Padilla v. Lever, a case that alleges that the referendum, initiative, and recall petition process violates the Federal Voting Rights Act. Last week, Federal District Judge Whyte, having been urged to throw a Santa Clara County General Plan initiative off the ballot, declined to do that. He stated, in fact, that the chances that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals would find the initiative process to be inconsistent with the Voters' Right Act were (quote) "not great."

What is great? A Judge who defends the public's right to use the referendum, initiative, and recall - these immensely valuable "tools of democracy."

In Monterey County, concerned voters qualified a "Community General Plan Initiative," but Federal District Judge James Ware held that a Ninth Circuit decision, Padilla v. Lever, decided that the California initiative process violated the Federal Voting Rights Act. Subsequently, the Ninth Circuit withdrew that decision, and there is no current precedent that says that the people's right of referendum, initiative, or recall violates the Federal Voting Rights Act. Nonetheless, the people of Monterey County are still being denied the right to vote on the Community General Plan Initiative, or to vote on the controversial Rancho San Juan project, which should also be on the ballot (for the second time) pursuant to a successful referendum petition drive.

Denied the use of their most powerful direct way to participate in land use decision making, some Monterey County residents are undoubtedly so discouraged that they've decided simply to "drop out" of the public participation process. There is another reaction, which is to jump in even more forcefully. If you're mad about your inability directly to vote on the land use issues that concern you, think about going to some of the upcoming public hearings on the General Plan, and participate that way!

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

Upcoming General Plan Schedule in Monterey County (Planning Commission Hearings):

September 13th -- Conservation, Housing, Safety
September 14th -- Continuation of September 13th Hearing
September 21st -- Land Use, Agriculture, Housing, Conservation and Open Space
October 4th -- Agricultural Winery Corridor Plan
October 5th -- General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report [Final Hearings]
October 11th - General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report [Final Hearings]

For more information on how you can participate, call LandWatch Monterey County at 831-422-9390

The land use and police powers of local government are "plenary." That means that the power of local government to act in the public interest is not limited. Local officials don't have a "list" of things they're entitled to do, with everything else forbidden. It's just the opposite. Local officials can pretty much take whatever actions they think are best, unless there is some law (or Constitutional provision) that specifically forbids them from acting. Because the powers of our local elected officials are so immense, we need to utilize the referendum, initiative, and recall when our local officials either do something that the public doesn't really believe is in their interest, or fails to do something that the public thinks that local government should do.

State government, however, "trumps" local government every time. The powers that local governments have are "delegated," pretty much, from the state, so the State Legislature and the Governor can limit the scope of local government action. This past legislative session, there was an effort to do just that, to prevent local governments (like Santa Cruz County) from banning the use of genetically modified crops. The bill that would have cut off such local efforts was Senate Bill 1056, by Senator Florez, and it failed to pass in the last hours of the legislative session on Thursday, August 31st. You can get more information by clicking on the links below.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Information on SB 1056
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb
_1056&sess=CUR&house=B&author=florez

Information on Senator Florez
http://democrats.sen.ca.gov/templates/SDCTemplate.asp?cp=
MemberPage&pg=senhome&sln=Florez&sdn=16&zrn=Zone/

Each week, I go back and forth between Sacramento and Santa Cruz County, and have lots of time to listen to books on tape. I've been listening to a book by Nathaniel Philbrick, entitled "Mayflower," which provides the history (among other things) of the "Mayflower Compact," one of the first evidences of democratic self-government in America.

In a different kind of "compact," the City Council of Salinas and the Monterey County Board of Supervisors have just entered into an agreement that came out of a series of closed-door meetings that were supposed to focus on litigation about Rancho San Juan. Rancho San Juan is the largest development project in Monterey County History, and when the Board approved it, the City of Salinas joined CALTRANS, LandWatch Monterey County, and the Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition in suing the County for inadequacies in the environmental review process.

Salinas has now settled its suit. That's what the latest "compact" is all about. The City got no substantive concessions on Rancho San Juan, except to share in some of the traffic fees, but it did get a County preemptive approval of the City's own massive development plans, allowing the conversion of over 3,000 acres of agricultural land. Two exceptionally well-written letters are available on the KUSP website, outlining what's really going on, and making clear that this "compact" is not about democracy.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

LandWatch letter
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/issuesactions/
salinasgp/082806salinaseir.html

Rancho San Juan Opposition Coalition letter
http://www.stopranchosanjuan.org/pages/
news/083006RSJMOU.html

The Mayflower Compact
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/
revolution/mayflower.htm

"Mayflower"
http://www.bookshopsantacruz.com/NASApp/store/
Product?s=showproduct&isbn=0670037605

The "PLAN Initiative" would enact General Plan policies for Santa Clara County that would protect rural, natural resource, agricultural, and open space lands, directing new development towards areas that are already committed to urban growth.

Of course, there are lots of areas devoted to urban growth in Santa Clara County. I grew up in Palo Alto, and watched Santa Clara County go from one of the premiere agricultural counties in the United States to an area mainly devoted to business and development (and for many years to the business of development).

The land use history of Santa Cruz County provides a kind of counterpoint, since the people of Santa Cruz County have tried to forge a different destiny on their side of the hill.

It's interesting to watch the current debates about land use in Monterey County, which is really facing the kind of choices that Santa Clara County faced following World War II. Santa Clara County chose the business of development (not the business of agriculture), with the results (both positive and negative) that we see today. The PLAN Initiative is trying to save what's left of Santa Clara County. In Monterey County, the Community General Plan Initiative is trying to preserve the current commitment of Monterey County to agriculture, and to keep it out of the business of development.

The difference is that the people of Santa Clara County are going to get to vote. If you'd like to get involved in that campaign, there's some information on the KUSP website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

PLAN Initiative Website
http://www.openspace2006.org/

To get involved, contact Brooke Anderson -- brooke@openspace2006.org. Telephone: 408-947-7526

A mailing party on behalf of the PLAN Initiative will take place Sunday, September 10, 2006, from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. at the Peninsula Conservation Center, 3921 East Bayshore Road, in Palo Alto. Directions are available at
http://ww.acterra.org/contact/locations.html.