 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of September 22, 2008 to September 26, 2008
Week of September 22, 2008 to September 26, 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 September 22, 2008 to September 26, 2008
- Monday, September 22, 2008
The Airport Land Use Commission
- Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Big Day in Santa Cruz County
- Wednesday, September 24, 2008
The League of Women Voters
- Thursday, September 25, 2008
The “Pros” and “Cons” on Measure Z
- Friday, September 26, 2008
Measure Z: Some Other Issues
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, September 22, 2008 The Airport Land Use Commission |
 |
|
Regular listeners know that cities and counties are the local government agencies with the main responsibility for charting a community’s land use future. Cities and counties, however, aren’t the only governmental agencies whose decisions have an impact on land use policy. For instance, each county has a Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, and LAFCOs play a major role. And then there is the little-known Airport Land Use Commission. Sections 21670, and following, of the California Public Utilities Code, outline what these very specialized agencies, Airport Land Use Commissions, are supposed to do. In a nutshell, they are charged with promoting the orderly development of the area surrounding each public use airport in the state, and promoting the overall goals and objectives of California’s adopted airport noise standards, and to prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems. If local land use policy decisions might impact a public use airport, the Airport Land Use Commission may have a lot to say about land use policy, and their decisions can have the force of law. Today, at 3:00 p.m., the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission will review the proposed Monterey County General Plan Update. Their meeting is in the Board meeting room of the Monterey Peninsula Airport District, 200 Fred Kane Drive, in Monterey, Suite 200. You can get more information below. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, September 23, 2008 Big Day in Santa Cruz County |
|
Cities and counties are the governmental agencies with the most important role to play in land use planning. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors is meeting today, and their meeting proves this point. Every item on the Board’s regular agenda relates to some aspect of the land use planning process. Because the Board makes its agenda packet available online, you can easily get information on these topics, and can use the County website to email in a comment, which the Board will receive and consider in real time. Here’s what’s on the agenda today:
In no other California County is there an official procedure intended to put future growth under the effective political control of the residents of the county. That’s what Measure J did, among other things. Think about getting involved in that process. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, September 24, 2008 The League of Women Voters |
|
If you are a Monterey County resident, and want to become more informed on local government and land use policy matters, think about joining up with the League of Women Voters. By the way, men are definitely invited. There are two Chapters of the League of Women Voters in Monterey County. One is based in the Salinas Valley, and one is based on the Monterey Peninsula. I like to check their websites from time to time, because they often have important information on key land use and local government issues. I’ve posted links below. Tomorrow, the Monterey Peninsula League will be moderating two candidate forums, one covering the Mayor and City Council election in the City of Monterey; the other focusing on the Mayor and City Council election in the City of Pacific Grove. I encourage Monterey and Pacific Grove residents to attend and participate. The people elected to these city councils will definitely have a great impact on the future of land use policy in Monterey County, and not just within their own cities, either. The Monterey Peninsula League’s website also has an item relating to the upcoming election on Measure Z, which proposes a sales tax increase to be used to fund future transportation projects. There’s a very helpful “pro and con” presentation on the website, and I’ll talk more about that tomorrow. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, September 25, 2008 The “Pros” and “Cons” on Measure Z |
|
A “pro” and “con” analysis of Measure Z is available on the website of the League of Women Voters of the Monterey Peninsula. Measure Z will be on the Monterey County ballot this November. It would levy a countywide 25-year one-half cent sales tax increase, and this sales tax increase would raise nearly $1 billion. A number of specific projects, listed in the League analysis, are proposed. The greatest single share of the money would go to new highway projects, as opposed to expenditures for either transit or maintenance of existing facilities. The League lists a number of benefits claimed by those supporting the sales tax increase. These most notably include a claim that the County’s transportation system is stretched beyond capacity, and will get worse in the future, and that tourists might stop coming to Monterey County, because of traffic congestion, if Measure Z is not passed. The opponents’ arguments, as listed by the League, include a claim that Measure Z would put most of the weight on local taxpayers, while not requiring fair share contributions from agriculture and the hospitality industry, which will receive some of the major benefits of the expenditures. The League’s analysis does not mention either the growth inducing impacts of Measure Z, or whether Measure Z would increase the “efficiency” of Monterey County’s transportation system. You can get my views on those topics by listening in tomorrow. In the meantime, check below for links to more information. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, September 26, 2008 Measure Z: Some Other Issues |
|
If enacted by the voters of Monterey County this November, Measure Z would increase the County’s sales tax by one-half cent, and that increased sales tax would then be in effect for the next twenty-five years. The proposed tax increase would raise about $1 billion. Because the largest single share of the proposed tax increase would go for new highway projects, it’s quite likely that the impact of Measure Z would be to stimulate new growth on the County’s agricultural lands, and in the County’s more rural areas. When the public invests in new transportation facilities, they can expect their investments to be used (i.e., the new traffic capacity will be absorbed by new traffic generated by new growth). Measure Z could have contained a commitment not to spend the new funds except for “smart growth” type projects, but it didn’t do so. In addition, Measure Z doesn’t much take into account how the new funds might stimulate the more “efficient” use of existing facilities. In the areas of energy and water policy, we are learning that we can provide new “capacity” not by building new facilities, but by using existing facilities and resources more efficiently. Where transportation is concerned, this would mean finding ways to discourage single occupant vehicle trips, and to increase shared modes of transportation, like transit, rail, and vans. Those issues, as well as the financial ones, ought to be on the voters’ minds this November. 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 |
|