Item #7 on tomorrow's Agenda of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors is listed under "Ceremonial Resolutions." I'm not sure that I'd classify the proposed Resolution as "ceremonial." If adopted, as I expect it will be, the Resolution will have some very practical impact in the real world. By adopting the Resolution, the County will be putting itself officially on record in support of a grant from the State Department of Conservation to the Ag Land Trust. Without that statement of official County support, I question whether any money would be forthcoming.

The Ag Land Trust has a proud record of success in preserving significant agricultural land in Monterey County. Here's how it works. The Ag Land Trust identifies productive agricultural land that might be subject to future development; it then raises money to be able to purchase an "easement" on the land. The land continues in private ownership, and in agricultural production, but now with an official restriction that prevents the future development of the land for non-agricultural purposes. The program is completely voluntary, and provides capital to agricultural land owners, that they can then use to support their agricultural enterprise. In this case, 103 acres of vineyards near Greenfield are going to be preserved. You can get more information in the transcript of today's Land Use Report.

More Information:

Gary Patton writes a daily blog, "Two Worlds / 365"
http://www.gapatton.net

Agenda, March 22, 2011 Meeting, Monterey County Board of Supervisors
http://publicagendas.co.monterey.ca.us/

Monterey County Ag Land Trust
http://www.aglandconservancy.org/

Yesterday, I talked about today's meeting of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. Today, let me give some equal time to the Santa Cruz County Board.

Item #49 on today's agenda of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors is a public hearing on proposed amendments to the County Code, to attempt to provide some permit "streamlining." In already-developed areas of the unincorporated County (areas like Aptos and Live Oak), which are within what the County identifies as its "Urban Services Line," proposed developments sometimes need variances from the standards set in the County Code. Obtaining such variances takes time (and costs money), and developers routinely complain about having to go through the variance process for permission to do things that they think raise no significant planning or zoning questions.

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What some think are "minor" variance requests are regarded by others as significant changes that could adversely affect adjoining properties, or the neighborhood in general. That's why there is a variance procedure, to allow everyone to have their say, before the County officially gives either a "yes," or a "no" answer to a specific variance request.

If this sounds like a subject that could interest you, from either the development or the neighborhood side, you should be at the Board meeting, this morning, at 9:00 o'clock.

More Information:

Gary Patton writes a daily blog, "Two Worlds / 365"
http://www.gapatton.net

Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda
http://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Government/
BoardofSupervisors/MeetingAgendasandMinutes.aspx

Agenda Item #49 on permit streamlining
http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/
BDSvData/non_legacy/agendas/2011/20110322/PDF/049.pdf

I think I talked about the OPR before, when I was discussing planning "acronyms." Let me highlight this state agency again, since it plays (or could play) a significant role in the development of the state's basic land use policies.

"OPR" stands for "Office of Planning and Research," sometimes called the "Governor's Office of Planning and Research." OPR was established as a way for the Governor to provide leadership on land use policy issues. The last Governor to use OPR as intended was Governor Jerry Brown (in his first tour as Governor). Since Governor Brown has not recommended cutting the OPR's budget this time, this may indicate that the OPR will once again have an important role to play on state land use policy.

Let me highlight one important assignment to the OPR: the preparation and updating of the state "Environmental Goals and Policy Report." The last officially adopted report was the Urban Strategy, adopted by Governor Brown in 1978. Santa Cruz County residents might be interested to note that the policies recommended in the Urban Strategy are virtually identical to the growth management polices adopted by Santa Cruz County voters in 1978, when they passed Measure J.

You can get links to Measure J, The Urban Strategy, and the OPR website in the transcript of today's Land Use Report.

More Information:

Gary Patton writes a daily blog, "Two Worlds / 365"
http://www.gapatton.net

OPR Website
http://www.opr.ca.gov/index.php

An Urban Strategy for California
http://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/
publications/urban_strategy.pdf

Measure J
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/
publications02/081802MeasureJtext.pdf

The Story of Measure J
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/
publications02/081802MeasureJstory.pdf

Monterey County got a little "Valentine's Day present" when the Save Our Peninsula Committee filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against the County of Monterey, and the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, on February 14th of this year.

While I am now practicing environmental law, and suing governmental agencies is part of the assignment, from time to time, I continue to believe that "politics," broadly and positively understood, is far more important than litigation in achieving the kind of land use policies that can define our future in the right way. That said, I certainly am glad that there is somewhere that people can go to get help and assistance if governmental agencies don't follow the law. That is what environmental litigation is all about; it's an appeal to the judicial branch of government for an order, telling some part of the legislative or executive branch of government what the legislative and executive branches need to do to obey the law.

In its recently filed lawsuit, the Save Our Peninsula Committee is seeking to enforce a Court Order, issued in the year 2000, requiring Monterey County to implement mitigation reporting and monitoring programs. If the County isn't doing such mitigation reporting and monitoring, they should. The Court is going to decide.

More Information:

Gary Patton writes a daily blog, "Two Worlds / 365"
http://www.gapatton.net

For more information on the Save Our Peninsula lawsuit, you can contact the attorney for the Save Our Peninsula Committee: Richard Rosenthal. His office is in Carmel Valley, and his telephone number is 831-625-5193.

Today's Land Use Report is a "heads up" for those who care about developments along Highway 68 in Monterey County (and I think that most residents of Monterey County should care about this topic. They will almost certainly be affected by the kind of developments allowed on Highway 68 by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors).

On Tuesday, April 12th, the Board is scheduled to hear an appeal of a proposed shopping center development that would be constructed at the intersection of Highway 68 and Corral de Tierra. Frequent listeners may remember earlier Land Use Report discussions of this proposed development. Two "flavors" of the proposed development are being considered at the current time: the developer's proposal, at 126,500 square feet, and a staff version of the project that would be 112,000 square feet. Both versions are very large, and either version would add significant traffic to an already-congested highway tying Salinas to Carmel Valley and the Monterey Peninsula.

At the Planning Commission, there was intense public interest, and the Commission turned down the proposal. At the Board, there will be what is called a "de novo" hearing, which means that no specific deference is given to the Planning Commission's recommendations and actions. In other words, if you care about what happens on Highway 68, you should plan to be at the Board hearing on April 12th.

More Information

Gary Patton writes a daily blog, "Two Worlds / 365"
http://www.gapatton.net

The Highway 68 Coalition is coordinating neighborhood testimony. You can contact the Highway 68 Coalition by email at: highway68coalition@yahoo.com. You can also check out the website at:
http://www.hwy68buzz.org