Tomorrow, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors will be considering a proposed subdivision on River Road. If approved, the subdivision would turn land that the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance now designate for agriculture and grazing into suburban cul de sacs. Scheduled for the Board’s afternoon agenda, this item is an example of how “project” level decisions can affect future land use. That is not actually the way it’s supposed to be done. Land use “policy” is supposed to guide project level decisions. That only happens, of course, when local governments actually follow their own policies, rather than changing them to accommodate development requests from individual property owners.

In Santa Cruz County, the Board is going to be considering an important “policy” matter tomorrow. Agenda Item #69 proposes changes to the Planned Unit Development regulations that affect residential and commercial developments in unincorporated areas like Live Oak, Soquel, Seacliff, and Aptos. This matter came before the Board previously, and I’m pleased to report that the redrafted version, to be considered tomorrow, is substantially clearer and better written, at least in my opinion, and makes certain that Planned Unit Development projects don’t shortcut those provisions of the County Code that are intended to protect natural resources.

You can get more information on both of these items on the KUSP website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Monterey County Board Agenda
http://publicagendas.co.monterey.ca.us/

The Mohsin-Samoske Subdivision proposal is Agenda Item #S-6

Santa Cruz County Board Agenda
http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/ASP/
Display/SCCB_AgendaDisplayWeb.asp?MeetingDate=6/2/2009
Proposed changes to the Santa Cruz County PUD Ordinance will be considered in Agenda Item #69

Boards of Supervisors have jurisdiction over all properties located in the “unincorporated” portions of the county. That means that land use project and policy decisions affecting all lands not located within a city are in the bailiwick of the Board of Supervisors.

Boards of Supervisors generally meet on Tuesdays, and as highlighted in yesterday’s Land Use Report, important land use items are being considered in both Monterey County and Santa Cruz County today. The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors also has important land use items on its agenda.

Agenda Item #E-1 is an annual General Plan “Progress Report.” The local General Plan is a local government “Constitution” for land use; there is no more important policy document at the local level, where land use is concerned. If you’d like to become engaged with land use policy issues in San Luis Obispo County, which is something I definitely endorse and encourage, you should download a copy of the staff report, and even consider attending today’s meeting. Yesterday, the San Luis Obispo County Subdivision Review Board faced a basket full of proposed certificates of compliance, minor lot line adjustments, and proposed subdivisions, all of which, if approved, would have the effect of increasing residential uses in the County’s rural areas. Whether that’s a good idea or a bad idea is always decided, ultimately, at the level of General Plan policy.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Agenda
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/bos/BOSagenda.htm

The most “basic” level of government, in our system, is not the “local” level or the “federal” level; it’s the “state” level. The United States of America is a “union” of states. The “states” come first, and all powers of government not specifically ceded to the federal government are retained by the states (and as the Constitution makes clear, to “the people”).

Local governments, though they are closest to the people, are not our “primary” government. Local governments are created by state government, and have no inherent sovereignty. This is now painfully clear, as the California state budget crisis is being addressed by proposals to “take away” money from local government agencies. A “Save Your City” effort has been mounted by California local governments, but it’s an effort to “persuade” the state government why it’s not a good idea to solve state fiscal problems at local expense. Local governments have no “right” to tell the state what to do. As between the state and local government, the state government always has primacy.

This is true in the land use policy arena, as well as in the fiscal arena, and this is why it’s important to follow state legislation affecting land use. Last Friday, I gave some tips on how listeners could follow state legislation through the “leginfo” website. Today, let me suggest you review the agenda of the Santa Cruz County LAFCO, meeting today, to see some of the bills that our local LAFCO thinks are important.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information:

“Save Your City”
http://www.saveyourcity.net/

Leginfo Website
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/

Santa Cruz County LAFCO
http://www.santacruzlafco.org/

LAFCO Agenda for June 3, 2009 Meeting
http://www.santacruzlafco.org/pages/agendas.html

At 9:00 o’clock this morning, the Santa Cruz County Transportation Commission is going to convene its regular monthly meeting. There is still time to attend in person, particularly if you’re in the Watsonville area. The Commission meeting will be held in the Watsonville City Council Chambers, located at 275 Main Street.

As I reviewed the agenda for this morning’s meeting, one item hit me particularly: Agenda Item #18 is a consideration of Draft goals, policies, and evaluation measures for the 2010 Regional Transportation Plan. Commission staff members will present this item to the Commission, but after they do that, members of the public will be allowed to speak.

Just as the local General Plan is the “Constitution” for land use policy at the local level, the Regional Transportation Plan is the “Constitution” for regional transportation policy. In Santa Cruz County (as in Monterey County) “regional” in this context means the entire county. In some areas, for instance in the San Francisco Bay Area, “regional” is defined to include several counties.

At any rate, if you care about future transportation policy in Santa Cruz County, take a look at Item #18 on today’s Commission agenda. Final action is not proposed today. In fact, there will be full environmental review, so there is lots of time for you to get engaged.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Santa Cruz County Transportation Commission Website
http://www.sccrtc.org/

June 4, 2009 Transportation Commission Agenda
http://www.sccrtc.org/packet/2009/0906/TCAgenda0906.html

Here’s one suggested policy addition from Agenda Item #18, Attachment 3:
Coordinate land use and transportation decisions to ensure that the region’s social, cultural, and economic vitality is sustained for current and future generations.(inadvertently omitted).

It’s always good to watch the California Coastal Commission in action. The quality of the staff work and analysis presented to the Commission is unparalleled.

Next Week, the Coastal Commission will be meeting in Marina del Rey, and items of particular relevance to the Central Coast Region will be considered on Wednesday, June 10th, starting at 9:00 o’clock in the morning. Among these is a proposed Santa Cruz County LCP Amendment to amend the Seacliff Village Plan to allow construction of a 3-story, 12-room hotel (with restaurant, spa, and associated improvements) at the corner of Broadway and North Avenue in Seacliff Village.

Thanks to modern technology, you don’t actually have to go to Marina del Rey to see the Commission in action. A link on the Commission website will allow you to watch the Commission in a live webcast.

By the July meeting of the Commission, it’s likely that the Speaker of the Assembly will have made her appointment of a local government official to represent this region. Monterey County Supervisor Dave Potter, who is currently serving, and Santa Cruz County Supervisor Mark Stone, and a number of local officials from San Mateo County have all been nominated. You can get a link to Supervisor Potter’s environmental voting record on the Commission in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, and I’ve also provided contact information for Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, in case you want to give her your views.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

California Coastal Commission Website
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/

Coastal Commission Agenda
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html

Coastal Commission Agenda and Live Webcast
http://www.cal-span.org/State_Webcast/CCC/stream_index.htm

Link to 2008 Coastal Commission Voting Chart
http://www.surfrider.org/california/2009/
05/california-coastal-commission-voting.html

Contact Information, Assembly Speaker Karen Bass:

California State Capitol, Room 219
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0047
Email: Assemblymember.Bass@assembly.ca.gov

District Office Telephone: (323) 937-4747
District Office FAX: (323) 937-3466
Website: http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/Speaker/