 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of January 21, 2008 to January 25, 2008
Week of January 21, 2008 to January 25, 2008
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 January 21, 2008 to January 25, 2008
- Monday, January 21, 2008
GPU 5: What’s Next?
- Tuesday, January 22, 2008
San Luis Obispo County Land Use Policy
- Wednesday, January 23, 2008
A Development Impact Fee For Monterey?
- Thursday, January 24, 2008
Transportation Taxes in Santa Cruz County
- Friday, January 25, 2008
Affordable Housing / Open Space
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, January
21, 2008 GPU 5: What’s Next? |
 |
Since 1999, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors has been working on a revision of the County’s current 1982 General Plan. I’ve lost track of exactly how many millions of dollars the County has spent on the General Plan and related items over the last eight years, but two expense items, adding up to about a million dollars, were recently reported in the press. In connection with settling a law suit filed by LandWatch Monterey County, the County has agreed to pay LandWatch more than half a million dollars for its attorneys fees and costs. LandWatch is a land use policy group that has been deeply involved in the entire General Plan Update process (and LandWatch has not hesitated to go to court when it felt that the County was violating the law). Two weeks ago, the County approved a contract amendment that will pay Jones & Stokes Associates $445,000 for a subsequent Environmental Impact Report on the latest version of the General Plan Update, known as GPU5. If you’re a Monterey County resident, and are following the General Plan Update process (and I hope you are), be aware that completion of the next draft EIR will trigger a new, 45-day review period, so your opportunity to participate in drawing up a General Plan to govern the future of Monterey County is still out there! There is more information on the KUSP website. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, January
22, 2008 San Luis Obispo County Land Use Policy |
|
The Monterey County Board of Supervisors isn’t meeting today, but if you’re down in San Luis Obispo County, check what their Board of Supervisors is doing. Monterey County is not the only county where there’s a lot of land use policy work underway. Today, the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors will be discussing a “Strategic Planning Session,” which means they’ll be talking a lot about budget and finance issues. Hopefully, the Board will be paying attention to the fact that the County’s land use policies have very significant budget and financial implications. Several years ago, the Sheriff of Monterey County came to an event sponsored by the community groups that had developed a “Community General Plan,” which was an alternative to the “big growth” plan then being advanced by development interests. The Sheriff’s point, which is undeniable, was that sprawling development patterns lead to a reduced effectiveness for rural law enforcement. It just costs too much to patrol everything. Compact, focused growth is a better public safety alternative. That’s certainly a lesson applicable in San Luis Obispo County, as well. This Thursday, January 24th, the San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on an inclusionary housing ordinance, to help provide more affordable housing, and will also discuss a new “Framework for Planning,” Part I of a proposed General Plan revision. As I said, there’s a lot going on. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, January
23, 2008 A Development Impact Fee For Monterey? |
|
Last week, I gave listeners a “heads up” about a series of public meetings to be held by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County, or TAMC. If you missed that, you can find those upcoming meetings listed again in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. Those TAMC meetings begin next Tuesday. This afternoon, you can get an advance presentation by attending a study session being held by the City Council of the City of Monterey. The City Council meeting will begin take place from 4:00 to 6:00 o’clock this afternoon, and will be held at the Monterey City Hall. The proposed sales tax increase is going to be discussed, and so is a proposed “development impact fee” for transportation projects. TAMC has tried to get voter approval for a sales tax increase before (and has failed). There have been a couple of significant complaints about the proposed tax, and one of them is that the money raised, if the tax is approved, will just facilitate more sprawl and development, leading ultimately to more traffic congestion; thus, the argument goes, the tax for transportation could be self?]defeating. Another complaint is that the tax represents a straight out subsidy to developers and industry, since ordinary citizens pay the increased tax, and a lot of the benefit goes to developers and those using the roads for business purposes. This is the objection that a proposed “development impact fee” is intended to address. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, January
24, 2008 Transportation Taxes in Santa Cruz County |
|
Today, those interested in the fascinating topic of transportation taxes can get their fix by attending a meeting of the Santa Cruz County Transportation Commission. The meeting will be held at 1523 Pacific Avenue, in downtown Santa Cruz, beginning at 9:00 o’clock this morning. The impact of the state budget on transportation is one of the discussion items, but more interesting will probably be a presentation on a proposed transportation sales tax measure for the November 2008 ballot. Yesterday, I talked about the plans to put such a sales tax increase on the ballot in Monterey County. Well, the Santa Cruz County Transportation Commission has a similar idea. In Santa Cruz County, though, at least one business group has recently voted to ask that no such tax be placed on the ballot next November. I don’t think Santa Cruz County businesses are against the idea of a public subsidy for the transportation projects that will provide them some business benefit, but it appears that any such tax measure in Santa Cruz County would go down to defeat. The meeting today may shed further light on this discussion. At any rate, I do recommend that you attend the meeting this morning, if you can, and that you check out the materials I’ve referenced in the transcript for today’s Land Use Report. Excerpts from transportation sales tax measures proposed in both Santa Barbara and Sonoma County are included. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday,
January 25, 2008 Affordable Housing / Open Space |
|
The relationship between transportation and land use, which I’ve been talking about a lot, is certainly one of the most important land use policy issues out there. But it’s not the only one! Last week, I read an opinion column in the Salinas Californian that is worthy of note. Alex Urciuoli, a citizen activist from Salinas, noted what an important role land conservancy agreements play in a community’s efforts to preserve and protect open space and agricultural lands. The essence of what is often called “smart” land use policy is to decide what goes where, so that development is directed to the places where it makes the most sense, and other areas are maintained for their natural and agricultural values. In the “toolbox” that communities can use to achieve an overall pattern of development that makes sense in economic, environmental, and social equity terms, land conservancy agreements play a big role. Let’s spotlight one other key issue: affordable housing. I’m pleased to report that the State Department of Housing and Community Development has established a special website, and is soliciting public ideas on how to provide a permanent revenue source for affordable housing. What about a real estate transfer fee, for instance, that dedicates a small amount of the sales price of a market rate home to an effort to provide housing for the community’s workforce? There is more on both these topics 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 |
|