Coastal communities benefit in innumerable ways from what ocean advocates call their “Blue Backyard.” Tonight, from 7:00 to 9:00 o’clock, experts will discuss the Draft Management Plan for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary at a meeting to be held at the Seymour Center in Santa Cruz. The Seymour Center is located at the Long Marine Laboratory, operated by the UCSC Institute of Marine Sciences. On Wednesday, November 9th, the program will be held again, and again from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m., but this time at the Irvine Auditorium, at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, 499 Pierce Street in Monterey.

The purpose of the “Making Waves” sessions just announced (that’s what they’re being called) is to help teach citizens and residents how to be an effective voice for protecting our coast and ocean resources. Public hearings on the proposed Sanctuary Management Plan will be held on November 30th, at the Monterey Conference Center, and written comments will be received until January 5th.

Listeners to these Land Use Reports will recall how important good land use regulations are to preserving and protecting the quality of our coastal and ocean waters. Hopefully, this is a theme that will be featured tonight and next Wednesday, and that will find its way into comments made on the proposed Sanctuary Management Plan. There is more information on the KUSP website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

“Making Waves” Event Flyer
http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/DocServer/
MakingWavesEvent.pdf?docID=2341

Seymour Center Information, including a map and directions
http://www2.ucsc.edu/seymourcenter/visitor_information.html

Sanctuary Website
http://www.mbnms.nos.noaa.gov/

Public Comment Notice on Proposed Management Plan
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/jointplan/drafts/mb_mp.html

It would be hard to overstate the importance of today’s election. In terms of its impacts on our land use future, both Santa Clara County and the City of Santa Cruz have ballot measures up for decision that will play a decisive role in the future of those communities. Plus, if Proposition 90 were to pass at the state level, it would pretty much mean the end of our system of land use regulation.

In Monterey County, the people are not going to be voting on their land use future. They’re not going to be deciding the fate of the Rancho San Juan project, and they’re not going to be able to express their views on a “Community General Plan” initiative that was qualified for the ballot. Members of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors (Supervisor Dave Potter excepted) have obviously decided to do whatever they can to make sure that Monterey County voters don’t have a chance to vote directly on key land use policies. The decision by LAFCO to prevent a vote by Carmel Valley residents, on a proposal to establish a new “Town of Carmel Valley,” is the latest example. Supervisors Calcagno and Smith joined efforts to prevent a popular vote.

Ultimately, voter review of land use policies in Monterey County will be restored by the courts, despite the Board’s efforts to delay and discourage such direct democracy. In the meantime, there’s plenty of reason to vote today, wherever you live. Check the KUSP website for my personal recommendations.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

My personal recommendations were discussed last week on the Land Use Report. You can get the transcripts of those Land Use Reports at http://www.kusp.org/landuse/2006/10/30.html. Here’s a summary of my recommendations:

• Proposition 90 – NO (Most important vote on the ballot, in my opinion)
  
  
• Proposition 1C – YES (Affordable Housing Bonds)
  
  
• Proposition 1A – NO (Reduces financial flexibility in tough times, favoring roads over people)
  
  
• Proposition 1B – NO ($20 billion for – mostly – cars; no principles to make spending environmentally sound)
  
  
• Proposition 1E – NO (Much of this “flood protection”  money may actually put more people in harm’s way)
  
  
• Proposition 84 – YES (Watershed protection and parks)
  
  
• Santa Cruz Measures I and J – YES (Gives local residents some say over future University growth)
  
  
• Santa Clara County Measure A – YES (Incorporates “Smart Growth” principles into the General Plan)

Land use policy matters are most frequently decided by City Councils and Boards of Supervisors. Persons who want to get involved need to pay attention to the agendas of these local government agencies. Naturally, it’s also good to listen to this Land Use Report, but the Land Use Report is definitely not your best and most comprehensive resource for community involvement. That depends on some effort from you!

One thing I recommend is for you to find the right website link for your City Council or Board of Supervisors, and also for your City or County Planning Commission. Put those links on your desktop, and check them out weekly, and you’ll know what’s going on. Here’s an example, from yesterdays’ agenda of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. These items will all be discussed (and probably decided) on December 5th. All of these hearings are scheduled for 9:00 a.m. Consider marking your calendar ahead:

• Proposed changes to the General Plan to allow new affordable housing and a new neighborhood park in the Seacliff area.
• Proposed revisions to regulations governing condominium conversions.
• Proposed zoning code changes that will probably affect future development in Live Oak, increasing the maximum lot coverage on certain parcels; and
• A proposal to add a very low income affordability component to housing units created through the conversion of non-residential lands.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Santa Cruz County Website
http://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/

Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda, November 7, 2006
http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/ASP/
Display/SCCB_AgendaDisplayWeb.asp?MeetingDate=11/7/2006

Monterey County and the State of California have been talking about improvements to Highway 156 for years. There’s another meeting now scheduled, on November 15th, and interested persons should attend.

Interested persons should also be asking some critical questions about who is going to pay for the proposed improvements. It appears that the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (or TAMC) may be seeking to let developers off the hook. That means the taxpayers, not the developers, will pick up the tab for the road improvements, and it can also mean that the road improvements will get stalled, either permanently or for a period of time, allowing unsafe conditions to continue to exist, and actually putting people’s lives in danger.

The TAMC project website says that the estimated cost of Highway 156 improvements is $300 million. However, TAMC has put out another cost estimate (the one that will determine how much developers pay), and that estimate is $102 million dollars less. If the real cost is actually $300 million, and TAMC only collects money from developers as if the cost were $198 million (and that seems to be the current situation), the public interest is the loser, and the developers are the winner. Monterey County taxpayers and drivers should pay attention! Go to the KUSP website and click on the Land Use Report link for more information.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

TAMC Website
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/

Highway 156 Improvement Website
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/hwyproj/hwy156.html

Public Notice for the November 15th Workshop
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/hwyproj/
pdf/156%20open%20house%20flyer%20English.pdf

TAMC Nexus Study (that sets estimated costs that will determine developer contributions. See Page 9, “List of Projects)
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/programs/
devimpfee/pdf/finalnexus.pdf

My unhidden agenda for the Land Use Report is to entice you into a little more personal involvement in land use issues than you might otherwise contemplate. I’ve found (with over 30 years of involvement in land use issues along the Central Coast) that when ordinary people do get involved in land use policy making, the ultimate result is better planning and better communities, and a lot of fun for those who do get engaged.

There is hardly anything more satisfying than changing the future of your community by getting together with friends and neighbors to make your local government agencies actually do what the majority of the people want. Along the Central Coast, Santa Cruz County residents have definitely known the joys of such community participation, from way back in the 1970’s, which is when I first got involved. There is a lot going on right now in Monterey County, where citizens and residents are taking affirmative action to make sure that the future of their community is not just a blank slate for big development, putting both the coast and farmland in danger. And let’s not discount San Luis Obispo County (or Santa Clara County, either, for that matter). There is a lot of citizen action almost everywhere in the Central Coast Region, and it makes me personally proud to see it.

If you want to learn about some keen “technical tools” for community planning, find out about GIS. Check the KUSP website for information on a meeting to be held in Castroville on November 15th.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

I’m always a bit hesitant to advertise events that tend to be “technical,” since I imagine that most listeners to the Land Use Report are just ordinary folks, not planning specialists. For “adventuresome” and serious citizen activists, however, finding out how to use Geographical Information Systems (or GIS), is likely to be both fun and helpful.

GIS Day 2006, sponsored by the Central Coast Joint Data Committee, is being held on Wednesday, November 15th, from 4:00 to 6:30 p.m. at La Scuola Ristorante, 10700 Merritt Street, in Castroville. For more information, please contact David Johnston by email: djohnston@ambag.org, or by telephone at 831-883-3750. You can check out the Central Coast Joint Data Committee website at www.ccjdc.org.