Many people believe that if it were illegal for members of the public to purchase, or own, automatic weaponry fewer such killings like those at the Sandy Hook Elementary School would occur. Others disagree, or believe that such restrictions would be unconstitutional or inappropriate. Efforts to impose new legal restrictions on gun ownership or sales have redoubled after the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and legislation of various kinds is now pending at both the federal and state level.

As far as I know, no local governments in California are proposing directly to regulate the sale or ownership of guns. Indeed, efforts directly to control gun ownership or sales at the local level might run into significant legal problems. Santa Cruz County Supervisor John Leopold, though, is asking for a democratic discussion about whether the land use regulations of Santa Cruz County should impose limitations on the locations where guns and ammunition may be sold. Item #43 on tomorrow’s Board of Supervisors agenda proposes a public hearing on that topic, and a moratorium on the location of new gun shops within the unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County until after that community debate has occurred.

A link to Supervisor Leopold’s letter, and the proposed moratorium ordinance, can be found at kusp.org/landuse.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• News Article on Sandy Hook Elementary School Killings
• Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda Item #43

The Monterey City Council is meeting today. I have posted a link to the Council agenda in today’s Land Use Report Blog. You can find that at kusp.org/landuse. You can browse through past, and sometimes future Land Use Report transcripts at that location, and it is easy to use that website to send me an email, to alert me to any topics you’d like to see covered in future Land Use Reports. I definitely encourage you to do that.

As for the Monterey City Council meeting, which takes place this afternoon and evening, there are a number of interesting items. To be considered during the afternoon session, Consent Agenda Item #3 would approve some changes to the City’s “traffic calming program.” Agenda Item #7 will be a Council discussion of the objectives of the City’s Neighborhood Improvement Program. In the Council’s evening session, starting at 7:00 p.m., the Council will consider making an appointment to the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (that’s Agenda Item #11), and will receive a report on the development of 290 Figueroa Street, the SP Passenger Depot (that’s Agenda Item #10).

On the other side of the Bay, the Santa Cruz City Council is holding a Special Meeting this evening. The Council will interview applicants for appointment to various City Advisory Bodies, and will be making appointments of its own members to other agencies, and to the Council’s own Committees and Task Forces.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Monterey City Council Agenda – January 15, 2013 Meeting
• Santa Cruz City Council Agenda for Special Meeting – January 15, 2013

Last week, I made a presentation to the League of Women Voters of the Monterey Peninsula, titled “Keeping Government Honest.” Besides making an appeal for lots of citizen participation (which is actually the only way to keep our governments honest, in my opinion), I outlined provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, the California Public Records Act, and state laws relating to conflicts of interest and disclosure requirements. If any KUSP listener would like to receive a PowerPoint presentation summarizing these laws, and providing references, please send me an email through the KUSP website, at kusp.org/landuse. I’ll be happy to furnish one.

Further on this topic, I have placed a link in today’s transcript to a letter sent to the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (or FORA) on behalf of the community group, Keep Fort Ord Wild. The attorney representing Keep Fort Ord Wild is charging that FORA is not properly complying with the Brown Act, which demands that public agencies make all their decisions in open public meetings. If you would like to see how Brown Act questions play out in “real life,” reviewing this letter would be a good start. The latest controversy involves the so-called “Guiding Principles” that I mentioned a few weeks ago here on the Land Use Report. The charge is that FORA’s Administrative Committee held a “secret meeting” to discuss the Guiding Principles.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Transcript of Land Use Report Advertising “Keeping Government Honest” Presentation
• Keep Fort Ord Wild Letter to FORA On Possible Brown Act Violations
• Monterey Herald News Article On Alleged Brown Act Violations By FORA
• Land Use Report on FORA “Guiding Principles”

A week or so ago, Stephen Vagnini, the Monterey County Assessor, alerted friends and acquaintances to the availability of a sophisticated GIS system, or Geographical Information System, on the Monterey County website. That online system provides lots of assistance to those interested in Monterey County land use. You can find a link at kusp.org/landuse.

Quite a few years ago, Robert Peterson, then the County Assessor in Santa Cruz County, played a leadership role in developing the Santa Cruz County GIS system. I have placed a link to that GIS system below.

I encourage KUSP listeners to become familiar with what I call the “joys of GIS.” These are powerful programs that provide extremely relevant information through a map-based interface. For instance, if you want to know about what land use regulations might affect your property, you can get some very good information from GIS.

Unfortunately, neither of these mapping programs is totally “user friendly.” If you know how to use them, they have great power. If you aren’t as adept, you may get frustrated. At least, that has been my personal reaction. The potential value of GIS to those interested in land use, however, is truly immense. Exploring these systems is lots of fun, and by “playing around” with the tools, you will find out how best to get the information you need. Give it a try!

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Monterey County GIS Site
• Santa Cruz County GIS Site
• Stephen Vagnini, Monterey County Assessor

If you would like to go for a walk tomorrow, it appears that there will be a “Forest Walk” on the UCSC North Campus, starting at 12:00 noon. If you’d like to participate, you should appear at the UCSC North Remote Parking Lot at 12:00 o’clock. I have included a link to a campus map in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, so those not totally familiar with the UCSC Campus will know where to go. Essentially, this parking lot is at the end of Heller Drive, which is the road you enter at the West Entrance to the UCSC Campus, off Empire Grade.

Possible development of the North Campus has been in the news quite a bit. Both the City of Santa Cruz and the University are seeking approval from the Santa Cruz County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, to extend City water to that area, to permit the development of over 3,000,000 square feet of new construction. Without the water, the North Campus is likely to remain as a Natural Reserve.

If you’d like to get a feeling for what is at stake on campus, taking a hike tomorrow might be educational, as well as good exercise. Here’s my regular disclaimer: the law firm with which I am associated is representing the Community Water Coalition, or CWC, which has been opposing the extension of water to the UCSC North Campus, because of a concern about the water policy implications of the proposal. Find out more about the “Forest Walk” below.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Map to the North Remote Parking Lot at UCSC.
• Teach The Forest Facebook Page
• Save Upper Campus Facebook Page
• Forest Walk Calendar