 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of December 14, 2009 to December 18, 2009
Week of December 14, 2009 to December 18, 2009
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 December 14, 2009 to December 18, 2009
- Monday, December 14, 2009
Upcoming Changes In Our Zoning Laws
- Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Rescuing Victims of Groundwater Overdraft
- Wednesday, December 16, 2009
What’s In The Future For Carmel Valley
- Thursday, December 17, 2009
The “MAC” Option
- Friday, December 18, 2009
Municipal Advisory Councils Explained
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, December 14, 2009 Upcoming Changes In Our Zoning Laws |
 |
| Items #49 and #50 on tomorrow’s agenda of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors are worth taking a look at. Both city and county governments have what are called “police powers.” This means that these local governments can establish rules and regulations to protect and advance the public health, safety, and welfare. And our elected officials have very broad discretion to decide what that means! When we elect our “representatives,” we actually give to them our own powers of self government, to exercise as they determine best. This grant of power to local officials is constrained by various state laws, and by the federal and state constitutions, and by some “political” remedies to help us keep our elected officials in line. These “political” remedies are the initiative, referendum, and recall.
The decisions of local governments that regulate our lives are usually contained in their adopted “Codes,” and the agenda items I just mentioned relate to proposed changes in the Santa Cruz County Code, and specifically to sections of the Code relating to land use and planning. Agenda Item #49 is a proposed set of Code “clean up” measures. More significantly, Agenda Item #50 proposes changes to the rules that govern housing “affordability” in the County’s unincorporated urban areas. Again, it’s worth taking a look at these items. I’ve put links in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, December 15, 2009 Rescuing Victims of Groundwater Overdraft |
|
As I mentioned yesterday, local governments have extensive “regulatory” powers. Our local elected officials are granted the right to “represent” us, and can decide, on our behalf, what sort of rules and regulations will best advance the public health, safety, and welfare. But the powers of local government go beyond the “regulatory” realm. Local governments also receive money from us, generated by taxes, or by fees or other charges, and our elected officials have the power to decide how to spend that money. Besides “regulating” us, in other words, local governments directly carry out projects on our behalf, and our elected officials decide what projects are good for us, and how to fund them, and how to implement them. There are lots of good reasons to pay attention to what your city or county government is doing! Today, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors is considering spending some money on environmental review of what they have called the Granite Ridge Water Supply Project. Agenda Items #S-9 and #S-10 outline the project, which is intended to provide a new and more reliable water supply for North County residents who are finding that their water supply wells are going dry, because of groundwater overdraft. This means that the County government has allowed new developments to be built, in the past, when there really wasn’t enough water. The ultimate payment for this rescue project, if ever approved and constructed, will fall on those who get rescued. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, December 16, 2009 What’s In The Future For Carmel Valley |
|
What’s ahead for Carmel Valley, in terms of land use, now that the voters have decided not to incorporate and bring land use under the direct control of Carmel Valley residents? The short and most accurate answer, of course, is that what happens in Carmel Valley in the future will continue to depend on what three members of the Board of Supervisors say will happen. No member of the Board currently lives in Carmel Valley, but the Valley does have one representative on the Board, Fifth District Supervisor Dave Potter. A review of past decision-making by the Board suggests that Carmel Valley residents would be wise to make friends with North County Supervisor Lou Calcagno, since it does take three votes to make a decision at the Board. Supervisor Potter has a great record of supporting Carmel Valley in its concerns about over-development, and while she is relatively new on the Board, Second District Supervisor Jane Parker has shown herself to be sympathetic to Carmel Valley concerns, too. The two Board Members who represent Salinas and South Monterey County, Supervisors Fernando Armenta and Simon Salinas, haven’t been very sympathetic to Carmel Valley in the past, which then means that Supervisor Calcagno (or his successor, since Supervisor Calcagno is up for election next year) will probably be the key vote. Tomorrow, I’ll have a more specific suggestion on what concerned Carmel Valley residents might do. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, December 17, 2009 The “MAC” Option |
|
If an area is in a city, it is said to be “incorporated.” That means that a municipal “corporation” (a city or town with a particular name) has governmental responsibilities for that area. If an area is not in a city, it is said to be “unincorporated.” All land use and other governmental decisions affecting unincorporated areas are made by the Board of Supervisors. Incorporating a city, in other words, means increasing “local control” over land use and other municipal affairs, and taking governmental responsibilities away from the Board of Supervisors. In Santa Cruz County, familiar unincorporated areas include Live Oak, Soquel, Boulder Creek, and Aptos, just to name a few. Land use in those areas is under the control of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. In Monterey County, unincorporated areas include Prunedale, Moss Landing, North Monterey County in general, Big Sur, the Highway 68 corridor, and Carmel Valley. Again, land use policy and project decisions in those areas are made by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. Some of the people who campaigned for the creation of a new Town of Carmel Valley are suggesting, after the failure of that effort, the creation of a “Municipal Advisory Council” for Carmel Valley, to try to provide a more local set of governmental representatives to respond to the concerns of Carmel Valley residents. I’ll have more on this idea tomorrow. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, December 18, 2009 Municipal Advisory Councils Explained |
|
Local government is rather “binary” in nature. A particular area is either “incorporated,” and thus governed by a locally-elected City Council, or it is “unincorporated,” and is governed by the County Board of Supervisors. The California Government Code, however, allows a Board of Supervisors to bridge this “binary” gap, by creating a “Municipal Advisory Council” for any unincorporated area, to provide advice on matters relating to that area. The jurisdiction of a Municipal Advisory Council can include, but is not limited to, advice on matters of public health, safety, welfare, public works, and planning. Unless the Board specifically provides otherwise, a Municipal Advisory Council may represent the community before any state, county, city, special district or school district, agency or commission, or any other organization on any matter concerning the community. The creation of a Municipal Advisory Council provides opportunities for increased local representation, while not displacing the ultimate authority of the Board of Supervisors. Although Carmel Valley residents determined that they didn’t want to create a new town of Carmel Valley, they might well respond favorably to the idea of a Municipal Advisory Council. And, while this idea is being pondered by County officials, why not think about a Municipal Advisory Council for the North Monterey County area, too? 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 |
|