Helping to make our governmental institutions actually deliver what the majority of the people want can be a lot of “fun.” A great book by political philosopher Hannah Arendt, titled On Revolution, argues that the word “happiness,” in fact, as used in the Declaration of Independence, refers to the feeling of substantial joy we have as we participate as citizens in making public policy. From my personal experience, from the days of the Save Lighthouse Field Association to the present, I’ve come to believe she’s right. We truly fulfill ourselves as human beings as we work together, in the communities we inhabit, to create a reality that responds to our deepest aspirations.

So how are we doing, as a “California community,” on a statewide basis, as our elected officials debate and discuss what may be the largest single borrowing proposal in the history of the State? From my point of view, I could be a lot happier. Last Friday night, the State Senate failed to pass a proposal (in the form of Assembly Bill 134) that would have authorized something like $30 billion dollars of borrowing. No Republican voted for the bill because the Governor sent “deal points” to the Senate, demanding new uneconomic dams, a rollback of environmental protections, and a reduction of funding for parks, open space, and coastal and marine protection. I think protecting our environment is central to our long term happiness, and I’m sorry the Governor apparently disagrees!

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

The text of AB 134 is available through the state’s “Leg Info” website
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/

Economy, environment, and equity are the “three E’s” of good land use policy. I’m fond of saying that “good” land use policies must advance all three of these goals simultaneously. And if you buy that basic premise, it’s easy to see why, of all the land use issues that directly impact us, our housing policies tend to migrate to the top of the list. Without adequate and affordable housing for working families, the strength of the local economy is undermined. Without affordable housing, we fall back, not advance, in achieving greater social equity. And, as it happens, exactly the kind of housing that meets our economic and social equity needs (well-designed, compact, urban-based housing with lots of community amenities) is the very best kind of housing in terms of its environmental, transportation, and land use impacts.

In Scotts Valley, tomorrow night, the City Council is considering an innovative policy that might stimulate more affordable housing in that community. In the City of Arroyo Grande, in San Luis Obispo County, as part of an appeal from a Planning Commission decision, the City Council will decide tonight whether or not to allow some second floor apartments to be constructed that might provide at least a few affordable housing opportunities that wouldn’t otherwise exist. Check the information below, and send me your comments and suggestions, as well.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

City of Arroyo Grande Website
http://www.arroyogrande.org/

Arroyo Grande Agenda Materials
http://www.arroyogrande.org/admin/meeting-materials.php

City of Scotts Valley Website
http://www.scottsvalley.org/

City of Scotts Valley Agenda Materials - http://www.scottsvalley.org/cca.pdf

The “Campaign for Sensible Transportation” is a Santa Cruz County group, and it’s likely to have members in Sacramento today, attending the meeting of the State Transportation Commission.
The Commission plays a vital role in transportation funding, making decisions about what projects get funded, and where, and when. The transcript for today’s Land Use Report has links to the California Transportation Commission website and agenda materials. You’ll see, if you review the composition of the Commission, that many of its nine members, appointed by the Governor, have direct ties to the construction industry. In general, the Commission tends to think that building new highways is a good idea. That isn’t necessarily the perspective of many Central Coast residents, including members of the “Campaign for Sensible Transportation.”

What is of specific concern to the “Campaign for Sensible Transportation” today is the proposal to widen a portion of Highway One, in Santa Cruz County, from Morrissey Boulevard to Soquel Avenue. This is, they argue, part of a larger project that was rejected by local voters, and so the project shouldn’t be build piecemeal. In addition, a Transportation Funding Task Force with about 100 members will have its first meeting on March 23rd, and this state action might preempt that local process.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

California Transportation Commission (CTC) Website
http://www.catc.ca.gov/

Agenda for March 15th-16th CTC meeting
http://www.catc.ca.gov/meetings/agenda/
06Agenda/06Mar/0306_Final.pdf

Letter to the local Transportation Commission on widening project
http://www.sensibletransportation.org/pdf/comments.pdf

For more information contact Paul Elerick of the “Campaign for Sensible Transportation” –

The Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC for short) is a local transportation funding agency, with jurisdiction limited to Monterey County. The most significant thing now going on, in terms of transportation funding, is probably a proposed sales tax measure, to be used to fund new highway and other projects. You can get information from the TAMC website, and I’ve put a link to that website in the transcript for today’s Land Use Report. Finding out more about this proposed sales tax increase should probably be a “class assignment” for Monterey County residents who are serious about learning what’s happening in the land use policy world. Since the sales tax election is in June, there will be ample opportunity for me to provide a suggested “reading list.”

For today’s assignment, I’d like to invite Monterey County residents to review a so-called “Nexus Study for a Regional Development Impact Fee.” It’s a 129-page document, and is also found on the TAMC website. It has some significant bearing on the proposed “Butterfly Village” project, which is phase one of the Rancho San Juan development proposal. The most critical impacts of Rancho San Juan are on the Highway 101 corridor between Prunedale and Salinas. The Nexus Study seems to demonstrate that those impacts will not be alleviated within the next twenty years, even if the sales tax increase is enacted and a regional development fee is imposed.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

TAMC Website
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/

California Transportation Commission (CTC) Website
http://www.catc.ca.gov/

Agenda for March 15th-16th CTC meeting
http://www.catc.ca.gov/meetings/agenda/
06Agenda/06Mar/0306_Final.pdf

TAMC Nexus Study
http://www.tamcmonterey.org/
prog_devimpfee/pdf/NEXUS_5-04.pdf

I wasn’t able to get out advance notice of their kickoff event, but I want to let San Luis Obispo County residents know about a “Green Build” educational series, entitled “Learn, Build, Save.” The kickoff event took place at the Ludwick Community Center in downtown San Luis Obispo last Wednesday evening. It was geared towards building professionals, though all members of the public were welcome. If you’ll check out the transcript for today’s Land Use Report, you can find out how to be sure not to miss future presentations in this series. “Green building” means using construction techniques that maximize energy conservation and water conservation, that maximize the use of recycled materials, and that minimize the use of materials containing toxics. I, personally, would encourage members of the public to learn more about “green building,” since it’s ultimately going to be customer and client demand that will move us towards a more ecologically sensitive approach to what we build. As in so many areas, policy changes need to come from the “bottom up,” and not just from the “top down.”

On the “top down” side, though, the state is making at least “baby steps” towards “green building” in state construction projects. The proposed infrastructure bond didn’t contain a “mandate,” but did highlight the benefits of “green building” in new educational facilities to be constructed with state funds.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Information on the Green Build Educational Series – http://www.slogreenbuild.org

Contact SLO Green Build at

You can get the full text of AB 134 (the proposed infrastructure bond bill) on the state’s legislative information website - http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.

The “green building” language is quoted below:

SEC. 13.   Section 17261 of the   Education Code   is amended to read:    

17261.  The State Allocation Board shall obtain construction plans for school buildings appropriate for school districts in various climates and geographical conditions of the state. The plans shall be composed of plans designed to meet the needs of school districts requiring school buildings of various sizes. The plans may include landscape suggestions.  The plans may include designs that promote the efficient use of energy and water, the maximum use of natural lighting and indoor air quality, the use of recycled materials and materials that emit a minimum of toxic substances, the use of acoustics conducive to teaching and learning, and other characteristics of high performance schools.