Because of the adoption of “Measure J,” in June 1978, land use decisions in the County of Santa Cruz must conform to a number of policies unique to Santa Cruz County. One of those policies, codified in County Code Section 17.01.030(e), says “it shall be the policy of Santa Cruz County that at least 15 percent of those housing units newly constructed for sale or rental each year shall be capable of purchase or rental by persons with average or below average incomes.” Chapter 17.10 of the County Code elaborates on this Measure J requirement. The system specified in Measure J is sometimes called “inclusionary housing.” That means that the community will require that housing opportunities not be completely market-driven. As new housing is constructed, it must “include” housing for those who cannot afford what might be the ordinary market price.

On tomorrow’s agenda, the Board of Supervisors will be considering some possible changes to the current Measure J housing program. I invite you to take a look at what’s being proposed.

Here’s a quick announcement for Monterey County listeners. This evening, from 5:30 to 7:30, LandWatch Monterey County is sponsoring a forum on the reuse of Fort Ord. It’s at the Hyatt Regency Monterey, One Old Golf Course Road in Monterey. It’s free, and you are invited!

More Information:

• Board of Supervisors Agenda
• Agenda Item #52 – Affordable Housing Program
• “Measure J” In The Santa Cruz County Code – Chapter 17

Yesterday, I mentioned the fact that the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors will decide, today, whether or not to make changes to the current affordable housing program that operates in Santa Cruz County. That would be a good reason to head down to the County Governmental Center at 9:00 o’clock this morning. There’s another good reason, too. Agenda Item #54 is a continued public hearing to consider the County’s 2011 General Plan Annual Report. Since the General Plan is so important, where land use is concerned, the Planning Department’s report on what happened last year, and what might be in store for the future, is very much worth reading. You can download agenda materials from the County’s website, if you can’t make it to the meeting yourself, and of course I encourage you to do that.

In fact, however, these two land use-related items are only part of what should be an engaging day at the Santa Cruz County Governmental Center. This could be a good time actually to make a personal visit. David Swanger, Santa Cruz County Poet Laureate, will make a presentation to the Board shortly after 9:00 a.m. (which I assume includes some poetry). The Board will also be holding a public hearing on its environmental packaging ordinance; the changes proposed would ban virtually any use of Styrofoam in Santa Cruz County.

Links to materials are available in today’s blog, online at kusp.org/landuse.

More Information:

• Board of Supervisors Agenda
• Agenda Item #52 – Affordable Housing Program
• “Measure J” In The Santa Cruz County Code – Chapter 17
• Agenda Item #54 – Annual General Plan Report

The California Public Utilities Commission (or PUC) regulates “public utilities.” This does not include utilities that are under direct public control. To the contrary, the PUC regulates IOUs (or investor-owned utilities), private corporations that often deliver gas, electricity, and water. In Santa Cruz County, most water utilities are now public agencies. You’ll probably remember the community struggle in Felton to take back public control over water service there. California-American Water (or Cal-Am) was in charge, but not anymore! On the Monterey Peninsula, the situation is reversed. Cal-Am delivers water service, so most of the water controversies involve the PUC, which regulates Cal-Am.

The PUC has a very interesting way to make sure that the “public” is directly and effectively involved in PUC proceedings. If approved, local groups can intervene in PUC regulatory proceedings, and actually be paid for their efforts on behalf of local ratepayers. The latest edition of The Carmel Pine Cone has a couple of stories on just this topic. Among other groups, LandWatch Monterey County is seeking official approval to become an intervenor in PUC proceedings affecting water delivery on the Monterey Peninsula. You can get links below.

More Information:

• Carmel Pine Cone, April 6-12 Edition (See stories on Pages 1, 10A, and 24A)

The Coastal Commission is meeting today. Before mentioning one of the important items on the agenda, let me express my personal thanks for the incredible contributions of Peter Douglas, the Commission’s former Executive Director, who died on Sunday, April 1st. In 1972, Peter helped organize the winning campaign for the passage of Proposition 20; he then helped write the Coastal Act, as enacted in 1976. Peter ended up serving as the Commission’s Executive Director for twenty-six years.

I am proud to say that Peter Douglas was my friend. I am also delighted to report that as the Coastal Act legislation was being negotiated, in the very final hours before the vote, Peter called me up, as the County Supervisor then representing Santa Cruz County’s North Coast, and asked me whether the Coastal Zone boundary on the North Coast should be just to the ocean side of Highway One, as then proposed, or whether it should extend inland to the top of the first mountain ridge. I urged the more extensive boundary designation, and Peter delivered that in the legislation. That has made all the difference for the protection of the Santa Cruz County North Coast.

Today, the Commission is voting on North Coast protection in connection with a permit application relating to future uses of the Coast Dairies and Land property. I hope the Commission will continue to provide maximum protection for the North Coast, as I feel certain that Peter Douglas would have urged.

More Information:

• California Coastal Commission Website
• Coastal Commission Agenda
• Agenda Item #15d - Santa Cruz County North Coast Item
• Peter Douglas: The WHY To Live (Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog)
• Activism (Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog)

The law firm with which I am associated, Wittwer & Parkin LLP, is representing Save Our Agricultural Land (SOAL) in connection with the agenda item on today’s Coastal Commission agenda.

If the weather is good, and you would like to get “out and about” tomorrow, please review the the links below. You will find a link to the California State Parks Foundation website, which is hosting nineteen environmental improvement projects at state parks on Saturday, April 14th. This effort is part of the Foundation’s 15th Annual Earth Day Restoration and Cleanup. Volunteers are encouraged to help maintain the beauty of California's treasured state parks. This year, the Foundation has provided grants of up to $15,000 (in a combination of cash grants and in-kind donations), to allow for the completion of larger projects that would otherwise be on maintenance backlog for the particular state park. With park closures and continued budget cuts looming for state parks this year, volunteer efforts are more important than ever to keep our state parks clean and safe for all to visit and enjoy.

Pacific Gas & Electric Company is involved in this restoration and cleanup effort, this being the eleventh consecutive year that PG&E has partnered with the Foundation. PG&E has contributed more than $1.5 million dollars to the effort. Last year, more than 1,200 volunteers contributed more than 3,700 hours at eighteen different sites. To take part, check the Land Use Report blog.

More Information:

• California State Parks Foundation Website
• Earth Day Restoration and Cleanup Day