 |
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 31, 2011 to February 4, 2011
Week of January 31, 2011 to February 4, 2011
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 31, 2011 to February 4, 2011
- Monday, January 31, 2011
More On LAFCO Water Policies
- Tuesday, February 1, 2011
A Bit More On Water
- Wednesday, February 2, 2011
LAFCO Meets Today On Water Policy
- Thursday, February 3, 2011
How To “Reform” CEQA
- Friday, February 4, 2011
For Professional Planners
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 31, 2011 More On LAFCO Water Policies |
 |
Last Friday, I reported that I expect to be at the Santa Cruz County LAFCO meeting this coming Wednesday, on behalf of the Community Water Coalition, which my law firm represents. LAFCO stands for “Local Agency Formation Commission,” and LAFCO has very important policy responsibilities under state law. The LAFCO meeting this coming Wednesday, is scheduled for 9:30 a.m., at the Santa Cruz County Government Center. Key water policy issues are on the agenda, and today, tomorrow, and Wednesday, I’ll give you a flavor for what’s going to be talked about. LAFCO decides, among other things, whether or not, and where, and when, and how much cities and special districts should be allowed to expand. In other words, should Watsonville, or Scotts Valley, or the City of Santa Cruz be allowed to expand their borders? That’s a question for LAFCO. Should the Soquel Creek Water District, or the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, be permitted to extend water service into new areas? That, too, is a question for LAFCO. How does LAFCO make the decision when questions like these are posed? State law provides some guidance, and the Santa Cruz County LAFCO has adopted some guidelines itself. On Wednesday, the main question is whether or not (and how) the existing LAFCO guidelines should be amended, to deal more explicitly with water supply and water quality concerns. As I said, more tomorrow! For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, February 1, 2011 A Bit More On Water |
|
As promised, here is some more information on the proposed new water policies that will be discussed tomorrow by the Santa Cruz County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO. LAFCO’s current guidelines do not contain any requirement that agencies that want to extend new water service outside their existing water service boundaries should be able to demonstrate that they actually have a reliable supply of water. If LAFCO decides to follow the recommendation of its Water Policy Committee (chaired by County Supervisor John Leopold), it will put the following new guideline into place: In any proposal requiring water service, the Commission requires that the agency that will provide the water will need to demonstrate the availability of an adequate, reliable and sustainable supply of water. This introductory statement in the proposed guideline is then followed by four subparagraphs of specific examples and exceptions. The law firm I work with is representing the Community Water Coalition, or CWC, and the CWC is urging even stronger language. Every County resident and business owner has a big stake in whether or not water agencies will have to demonstrate an adequate water supply before extending new service. Think about providing your own views to LAFCO tomorrow. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, February 2, 2011 LAFCO Meets Today On Water Policy |
|
This morning, the Santa Cruz County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, will be considering important water supply and water quality issues. The law firm with which I am associated is representing the Community Water Coalition, or CWC, and I will be at the meeting to urge a strong set of policies. Whatever your own views, I encourage you to attend and participate. You can get details on today’s hearing in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. Here is an example of one of the issues that will be discussed by LAFCO this morning. A new guideline is proposed that says: LAFCO recognizes that the water resources of Santa Cruz County are limited, and the Commission will seek to ensure that its decisions relating to water do not lead to adverse impacts on the existing conditions of natural resources of Santa Cruz County. In reviewing extraterritorial service applications, LAFCO will consider potential impacts of the proposal on water resources and will consider the efforts of the water agencies and land use agencies to maintain stream and river flows, promote high water quality of surface waters and ground water, and not add to groundwater overdraft. If you think this makes sense (or if you disagree) you should let LAFCO know your thoughts! For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, February 3, 2011 How To “Reform” CEQA |
|
The California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, attempts to address substantively difficult planning issues by creating a "process." The CEQA process is called an "environmental review process," and it requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report, or EIR, whenever a proposed governmental action "might" have a significant adverse impact on the natural environment. "Process" is particularly needed when decisions are made on an individual, or "project by project," basis. If the government can pretty much take any action it wants to, with respect to any proposed project, then each of those project level decisions must be studied, individually, with respect to the impact that they might have on the environment. Naturally, that takes time and money. There is a different approach, which substitutes "policy" decisions for "project" decisions. If government agencies were required to follow environmentally protective "policies," and require any proposed project to conform to those policies, there would be a lot less need for a project-by-project environmental analysis. In this direction lies true CEQA reform. That policy based approach, however, does require that the government tell landowners and developers that certain things will just not be approved. It's something to think about for those who would like to "streamline" the planning process. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, February 4, 2011 For Professional Planners |
|
For any professional planners who may be listening, here’s a “heads up” on an upcoming conference, scheduled for the elegant Monterey Plaza Hotel and Spa, adjacent to historic Cannery Row, in Monterey. The Association of Environmental Professionals, or AEP, is holding their 2011 Annual Meeting from Monday March 7th to Wednesday, March 9th, at the Monterey Plaza Hotel. The Conference will provide American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) credit, and Continuing Legal Education, or MCLE credit, will also probably be available. I think that non-professionals would be welcome at the conference, as long as they pay their way. There is a lot of good stuff on the agenda. Here is just a partial list of some of the important topics that will be covered during this three day meeting:
Again, this is just a partial list. Sounds like a great opportunity to learn about some of the most important issues facing not only professional planners, but all of us! 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 |
|