If you would like to help plan the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network, mark your calendar for some upcoming workshops.

The current proposal is for a “rail trail,” to be located along the right-of-way of the railroad line running from Watsonville to Davenport. This “rail trail” would serve as the “spine” of a broader network of trails that would provide connections to activity centers, coastal access points, and other key destinations. The trail proposed would serve bicycle, pedestrian, wheelchair, and other non-motorized travel on a paved right-of-way separated from vehicular traffic, and adjacent to the operational rail line.

The following series of evening public workshops will gather input on the Draft Master Plan. All the workshops will run from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.:

• Workshop #1 is today, Monday November 26th, at the offices of the Community Foundation, located at 7807 Soquel Drive in Aptos.
  
  
• Workshop #2 is tomorrow, Tuesday November 27th, at the Pacific Elementary School in Davenport.
  
  
• Workshop #3 is Wednesday, November 28th, at the Simpkins Family Swim Center, 979 17th Avenue in Live Oak.
  
  
• Workshop #4 is Thursday, November 29th, at the Civic Plaza Community Room, 275 Main Street, 4th Floor, in Watsonville.

This is Gary Patton.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• More information – Rail Trail Website

For the last twenty to twenty-five years, local governments in Santa Cruz County have tried to find ways to make businesses and developers “pay their own costs,” instead of relying on public subsidies. The idea is that developers and businesses should themselves bear the cost of the public infrastructure that will be required by the new development or the new business. Various “fees” have been imposed to achieve this goal of making businesses and developers pay for the public costs associated with their activities. One of the most common fees has been a “traffic impact” fee, so that mitigations for new traffic will be paid for by those who are helping to generate that new traffic. Today, the Santa Cruz City Council will consider rolling back some of those traffic impact fees, to benefit businesses, and to shift more of those costs back on to the public. If you have a position on that, think about letting the Council know.

The Council will also consider spending an additional $390,000 for consulting services from the Kennedy/Jenks consulting firm, partly in order to “educate voters” about the need for a proposed desal project. Again, if you have a position on this proposed expenditure, you should let the Council know what you think.

You can find a link to the Council agenda, and links to more information below

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Santa Cruz City Council Agenda – November 27, 2012
• Measure P Commentary
• Santa Cruz Sentinel Article On Council Meeting

I get a periodic news bulletin from the Central Coast Ag Task Force, and often find items of interest, some of which I pass on to KUSP listeners. Today, let me give you a “heads up” on an intriguing seminar that will be held at the University of California at Davis on Monday, December 10th. For most of you, this will just be informational, but some listeners, directly involved in agriculture, might want to make the trip.

The event is a one-day seminar on water efficiency and water quality in agriculture and horticulture, and the title of the event is “More Cash Per Splash.” It is sponsored by the Netherlands Embassy in Washington D.C., in partnership with the Netherlands Consulate in San Francisco, the University of California at Davis, and the Wageningen University in the Netherlands.

Three sessions are planned. The first will be a panel discussion, exploring the current state of affairs in California, and how future water supply limitations will impact agriculture and horticulture. The second session will showcase how applied science and technology can improve water efficiency in agriculture and horticulture. The third session will present groundbreaking innovations by both Dutch and California companies.

More information can be found below. If you are interested, you should register now; it’s first come, first served.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• More Cash Per Splash Seminar
• Specifics on the Seminar:
  Date: Monday, December 10th, 2012;
  Time: 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.;
  Location: UC Davis Alumni Center, Alpha Gamma Rho Room

The City of Santa Cruz is considering changes to its Heritage Tree Ordinance, found in Chapter 9.56 of the Municipal Code. The title of that chapter is “Preservation of Heritage Trees and Heritage Shrubs.” If you haven’t thought much about “Heritage Shrubs,” you are probably not alone. One of the code changes being considered is to eliminate the reference to “shrubs.”

Other changes proposed are probably of more consequence. One proposal is to eliminate, pretty much, any protection for large blue gum eucalyptus trees. Some people would probably be happy for such a change. Others, probably not. If you care, now would be a good time to get involved. The City Parks and Recreation Commission is overseeing the proposed changes, and I believe that they are intending to review the Heritage Tree Ordinance at a special meeting on December 3rd, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. I don’t find an online notice, so you should call the Parks and Recreation Department to double check.

Currently, there really isn’t much protection provided for Heritage Trees, which are large trees, more than fourteen inches in diameter. Property owners almost always get permission to cut them down. One change not being proposed, but that could help make sure that neighbors get to have their views heard before such trees are cut down, would be a requirement for a mailed notice to nearby residents. That’s not required now.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code
• Information on the City Parks and Recreation Commission

Since I am a lawyer, I read a lot of court decisions, but I strongly believe that court decisions aren’t just for lawyers. I have put a link to the California Courts’ website in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, and I invite you to browse around. That website makes it easy to read both the published and unpublished decisions of the Appellate Courts and the Supreme Court. The published decisions are “precedential,” which mean that they “are” the law. Obviously, that’s why attorneys read those cases. Not all law is “statutory.” A lot of law is what the courts say it is.

Recently, I read a case that might be of interest to KUSP listeners. It’s called City of Santa Maria v. Adam, and it arises out of a water rights dispute in San Luis Obispo County. The decision, filed on November 21st, was handed down by the Sixth Appellate District, which is headquartered in San Jose. This is the court that hears appeals from trial court decisions in both Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties.

What City of Santa Maria v. Adam teaches is that you can lose your water rights. The doctrine of “adverse possession,” sometimes called “prescriptive rights,” states that if someone uses your land for five years or more, openly, and with a claim that they have a right to it, they will end up owning the land. Turns out, the same rule applies to water rights. You can read about it by using the link below.

More Information:

• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Court Opinions Website
• City of Santa Maria v. Adam