The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors will meet tomorrow, and there are some interesting items on the agenda. Most notably, the Board of Supervisors is going to be holding what amounts to a “strategic planning session,” to consider the programs that the Department of Planning and Building will be undertaking during the year ahead. If you’re a San Luis Obispo County resident interested in planning and land use issues, the Board’s session tomorrow will provide a good “backgrounder” on what the Planning and Building Department thinks its priorities will be. The meeting tomorrow will also give some indication of what the Board of Supervisors thinks about planning and land use matters.

In fact, what the Board thinks is not yet clear. That’s because this is definitely a “New Year” for San Luis Obispo County where land use issues are concerned. Two members of the former Board of Supervisors lost their bids for reelection last year, so there is a brand new Board in charge, as of January 1st, and it’s likely that this new Board will take a more “environmental” and “public interest” approach, in contrast to the “pro-development” approach of the former Board. But that does remain to be seen. And you can start seeing how this Board will approach land use policy by attending the meeting tomorrow.

The Board is also going to consider whether or not to change procedures, to prohibit the kind of last minute agenda additions that made the approval of the Santa Margarita Ranch project (by the “old” Board) such a spectacle.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

San Luis Obispo County Website
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/site4.aspx

January 20, 2009 Agenda
http://slocounty.granicus.com/AgendaViewer
.php?view_id=2&event_id=54

Today is the first day of the rest of our lives. That’s particularly true today, as we inaugurate a new President, and as we wait with great hope and expectation for the words our new President will choose to speak, at this solemn moment, when we, the people of the United States of America, may once again begin to build a world that will be a worthy response to the blessings that history and Nature have provided us.

We create, by our actions, the world in which we most immediately live. While we ultimately live in the world of Nature, which we did not create, and while we are ultimately constrained by the “Natural Laws” that govern that Natural world, we live most directly in a world we create ourselves, by the choices we make, and by the laws we write, to direct and focus our individual and collective actions.

It is particularly easy to see this truth in the land use policy arena. How we decide to use (or abuse) the land is how we decide what sort of world we will build and inhabit, and what sort of world we will leave to our children.

The new Presidency beginning today is the “Yes We Can” Presidency. Si se puede! The reason that the entire world is holding its breath, as this new day for America begins, is that our new President has explicitly stated what we know, deep down, is true. We can create a world, within the world of Nature, that responds to the needs and aspirations of all of us, together.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

The “Yes We Can” Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

There has been a long and shameful tradition in Monterey County of “closed” litigation sessions being used by the Board of Supervisors to make planning decisions outside of public view. Using the threat of possible litigation by the developer as the excuse, the Board of Supervisors held many closed-door sessions about the proposed Rancho San Juan project, the largest development ever proposed in Monterey County history. The Board essentially approved a complete plan for the project with no public input or oversight. Public hearings were held, later, but it was clear that the Board had already made up its mind in these closed sessions. The upshot was that the people of Monterey County had to use their referendum powers, twice, to reverse decisions with which they profoundly disagreed.

While the Monterey County Board of Supervisors has a tradition of using closed sessions to discuss land use matters, the Monterey County Planning Commission has never done that. In fact, the legality of such closed meetings by a Planning Commission is suspect, since the Planning Commission is not entitled to make legal decisions on behalf of the County.

Last week, the County Counsel tried to extend the use of the “closed” litigation session to the Planning Commission, to permit the Commission to deliberate in secret. The Commission did something unexpected. It just said “no.” The Land Use Report joins with the Monterey County Herald in celebrating this decision in favor of openness and public participation!

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

Monterey County Herald Editorial
http://www.montereyherald.com/opinion/ci_11468620?nclick_check=1

Ralph M. Brown Act, The State’s Open Meeting Law
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?
WAISdocID=21597012119+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

An opinion piece in the Ventura County Star highlights a policy debate that isn’t exactly making the front pages. Here’s what Thomas Elias has to say:

It’s fast becoming clear that all the talk about fighting global warming from Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and leading Democrats … might be just so much hooey….

That’s the implication of the final item in the Democrats’ lengthy list of proposed cuts….
That item: Cut $35 million by eliminating money that now allows counties to run the Williamson Act program for preserving agricultural lands….

Farmland preserved by the Williamson Act takes more of the world’s primary greenhouse gas — carbon dioxide — out of the air than any other program now contemplated. More than the proposed tailpipe emission changes and carbon-trading programs proposed as ways to carry out … AB 32, the most aggressive anti-climate change bill ever passed anywhere. More than scrubbing every smokestack in California. More than all proposals to clean up ship- and truck-caused emissions from all California’s ports put together.

I’ve provided a link to the article in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. Elias is undoubtedly right that preserving and protecting agricultural land, as opposed to converting ag land to more sprawl developments, is of real benefit in efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. Not to mention the other benefits of protecting farmland, not least the economic benefit!

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Thomas Elias Opinion Article
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/
jan/09/dumping-williamson-act-is-pure-hypocrisy/

Making good land use policy decisions often isn’t all that easy. Take solar power as an example. Finding ways to make a quick transition away from energy sources based on the combustion of fossil fuels is vitally important for the future of the world. But there are some real land use policy questions involved when large scale solar installations are proposed. Some of those questions will need to be addressed, soon, in San Luis Obispo County. As the San Luis Obispo County Tribune has noted, three different firms have made applications to build solar plants along Highway 58, north of the Carrizo Plain National Monument. The latest application, by the SunPower Corporation, is for a 250-megawatt plant, to be called the “California Valley Solar Ranch.” If approved, it would generate enough electricity to power nearly every home in the county.

SunPower claims that their solar technology is the most efficient in the world. It uses a patented tracking system, which rotates the solar panels so that they are constantly facing the sun. However, what impact would such a massive installation have on wildlife habitat in Eastern San Luis Obispo County? My prediction: the decisions won’t be easy ones. I encourage San Luis Obispo County residents to get involved now.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

News Story on Proposed Solar Development
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/566/story/590585.html