June 6

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION WANTS TO TAX RURAL RESIDENTS IN HIGH FIRE RISK AREAS TO UPGRADE POWER GRID

In a couple of related actions, it seems the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) wants to charge new fees to make us pay for improvements that utilities have put off for years, to the detriment of those living in the high-fire risk areas.

Please read what the Rural Counties Representing California (RCRC) has to say:

CPUC Seeks Input on Whether to Impose a New Fixed Charge on Electrical Customers Living in High Fire Threat Districts | Rural Counties

Submit your comments on the CPUC Docket here

GOVERNOR WANTS TO LIFT CAP ON PUC MONTHLY SURCHARGES TO ENABLE FUNDING POWER GRID IMPROVMENTS IN HIGH FIRE RISK AREAS THAT INCLUDE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
According to the Rural Counties Representing California (RCRC), Governor Newsom has added a trailer to the energy bill that would lift the current $10/month cap of the amount of money the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) can legally charge utility customers, opening the door for a new tax that would help fund power grid improvements in areas the CPUC has deemed “high risk”.  

This is statewide, but includes areas of the CZU Fire burn scar, and extends along the Summit area south, all the way to the Monterey County border.

What would this new money accomplish?  Take a look:

Governor’s Trailer Bill

• The Strategic Reliability Reserve Fund is hereby created.
• The Distributed Electricity Backup Assets Program is hereby created.
•  The Demand Side Grid Support Program is hereby created

So, why is the Governor expecting the people to pay for the over-due infrastructure improvements that the utilities have put off doing?

Contact your State representatives with your thoughts:

Senator John Laird
Assemblyman Mark Stone   

THE PUC WANTS TO TAX YOUR RESIDENTIAL SOLAR POWER SYSTEM
According to Mr. John Kennedy at The Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)  the PUC has recently placed a hold on the idea to tax residential solar power systems because the State Administrative Law Judge required more information.

Here is the Judge’s order to set aside the former proposed ruling, and ask for further limited public comment

In order to limit number of pages that legal parties can file and to extend public comment period from June 24 to July 1, 2022

Send in your comments! 

EXECUTIVE ORDER IMPOSES NEW RESTRICTIONS FOR WELL PERMITS
On March 28, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-7-22, yet-another mandate to impose more control over local water resources.  Elements of the Executive Order require that anyone applying for a well permit (new or rehabilitation of existing well) will first have to get a hydrogeologist to sign off to verify that the well will not adversely affect any wells nearby or cause adverse impacts to the aquifer.  That will be an expensive claim to verify, and could be impossible, given the fact that locations of all wells are unknown.

Until now, the County has exercised ministerial approval over such applications, but now must make applicants get expensive studies to meet the new State requirements.  The odd thing is that the well permit applications must now also pass through approval of the local MidCounty and Santa Margarita Groundwater Agencies…how will that work?

See page 16, Paragraph 9b to learn more   

ONE-TIME HELP FOR THOSE WHO ARE BEHIND ON PAYING WATER BILLS
If you or someone you know is behind on their water or wastewater bill payments, for any reason, a new program to help with a one-time payment is launching this month.  

Let’s hope the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District administrators sign up to participate in this program!

Your household may qualify if:

• ?Your total household gross income is at or below 60% of the State Median Income (see table) or a household member is a current recipient of CalFresh or CalWORKs;

• You have a past due amount on your water or wastewater bill;

• ?You receive service from a community water system or wastewater treatment provider (private wells and septic excluded); and 

• Your water or wastewater system opted into the program. 

California Department of Community Services & Development
2389 Gateway Oaks Drive
Sacramento, CA 95833-4245

Low Income Household Water Assistance Program

APTOS LIBRARY DEMOLISHED…SALVAGE MATERIALS GOING TO MEXICO?
Demolition crews made quick work of removing the Aptos Library a couple of weeks ago.  Was anything salvaged?  

According to conversation with Mr. Damon Adlao, Project Manager with the new County  Community Development Dept. (aka Public Works), the demolition crews were able to successfully salvage more than the 50% required by the State’s Green Initiative.  

He’s still checking to confirm that initial report, but feels there was good attention given to salvaging as much as possible from the structure as it was demolished. 

He said the salvaged materials will be going to Mexico.  Isn’t that amazing?

He also mentioned there have been some permitting issues that have caused the Project delay, but hopefully, construction will get started soon. Here is an article from the Aptos Times, showing what that new Library will look like  

FINALLY…THE BIKE LANE IN APTOS IS CLEAR AND SAFER
Many thanks to County Public Works for clearing the wicked Himalayan blackberry vines that had completely covered the eastbound bike lane on Soquel Drive in Aptos. 

The berry vines caused bicyclists to dart into the lane of traffic or risk being injured by massive thorns. Members of the public had requested for many years that this hazard be cleared for safety …and it finally got done.  Hooray!

MAKE ONE CALL.  WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE SURE YOU VOTE!  MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY JUST DOING SOMETHING.

Cheers, Becky

May 30

WHAT DOES THE SUSTAINABLE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY PLAN MEAN FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?

Last Wednesday, the County Planning Commissioner Rachel Dann expressed her concern that only one member of the public spoke during the first of the four Study Sessions to examine the Draft Santa Cruz County Sustainability Plan and General Plan Updates.  “This is the most important land use change in 40 years, and only one member of the public commented today.”  

She questioned why there would no longer be a required (page 13 C-6).  She asked that there be stricter requirements instead. 

She also asked how the State density bonuses would intersect with the new higher density/acre allowances.  

She noted that new developments could count the entire total site square footage for calculating density allowances, even though not all of the property could be considered as developable (eg, riparian area or overly-steep slope).  This debate roused the attention of County Counsel Mr. Zazueta, who asked for definitions of “gross site area” vs. “net development area”.  Planner Stephanie Hansen seemingly dismissed the potential impact this new allowance that could substantially raise density in the buildable portions of such parcels, saying “We never meet densities that are possible. These are small changes that will not result in massive growth.”    Well….that’s easy for her to say.  

Commissioner Dann then responded “Moving from 20 units/acre to 40 units/acre IS a big change and the public needs to be aware of this.”

The discussion turned then to the new Regional Housing Number Allocation (RHNA) numbers AMBAG just cooked up, requiring the County to build 3 1/2 times the number of units per year as was required by the State in the past.  To that, Ms. Hansen said “Hopefully, we can do that without extending the Urban Service Line.”

Commissioner Dann then responded the photos in the Draft Plan don’t really address what the new ResFlex densities would look like, showing nothing over three stories.

She wanted to know how the Planning Dept. noticed the public hearing?

Good question!  How many people even know what the County is planning to allow in their neighborhoods?

Chair Mr. Gordin had questions about when the Commission might see the newly-zoned ResFlex areas identified?  Staff responded that maybe by the next Study Session on June 8, those “Opportunity Sites” would be known.  

Mr. Gordin commented that the new Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowed for commercial mixed-use developments was decreased to only 35%, as opposed to existing 50%, and asked why it seemed to be concentrated in one zone.  Again, Planner Ms. Hansen stated “We just don’t see new development attaining maximum density allowed.”  

Again, based on the Aptos Village Project history, what if Swenson swoops in and waves the money under the County’s nose…anything would become possible, and under the new Plan, it would be fine.

The May 25 Planning Commission Study Session was basically a repeat of the first public meeting overview held back in March.  Oddly, those video recorded meetings are no longer available on the Planning Dept. website for reference.  Hmmmm….

I suggest everyone who cares about the quality of life here, and what Santa Cruz County will look like in the future take a moment to read through the Draft Santa Cruz County Sustainability Plan and start submitting comments right away.  Attend the June 8 virtual Planning Commission Public Hearing to learn more about the dense new “Areas of Opportunity” that might be in your backyard.

Get Involved  

BUYING THE WATSONVILLE HOSPITAL…WHAT ABOUT THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL COSTS?

One must ask…how will the Hospital be financed and operational, if this big chunk of money suddenly appears?

$16 million in 90 days: What’s needed to close public purchase of Watsonville Community Hospital 

IS A $20 MILLION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REALLY BEST SWEPT UNDER THE SUPERVISOR’S CONSENT AGENDA?

I was glad the County Board of Supervisors pulled from the Consent Agenda the proposed $20 million Capital Improvement Project to re-do the sewer lines in Live Oak that requires the County go into debt to finance.  This is to allow the Kaiser Medical Project but also to increase the capacity to accommodate the proposed dense infill in the Live Oak area.  

Public Works Director Mr. Machado stated the work will all be done in only two years.  Wow.

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD FOR LIVE OAK LIBRARY ANNEX PUBLIC ART

The public’s testimony convinced the County Board of Supervisors that a nine-foot tall rusting art piece celebrating the concrete tetrahedrons at the Harbor was not only ugly, but also did not reflect the character of Live Oak.   Chair Manu Koenig agreed and asked that instead a revolving exterior and interior art exhibit occur, rather than spending $95,000 in Measure S monies for the sculpture proposed.  Supervisor Friend suggested the Arts Commission start over again, with more clear parameters about what was needed.  

Happily, the Board approved doing so.    Good work to the Live Oak residents who spoke out, and their Supervisor actually listened.

FYI…The Board approved $120,000 in Measure S monies for artwork at the new Aptos Library. 

MORE ABOUT SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT USING PUBLIC STREETS FOR CONSTRUCTION STAGING

Recently, I wrote about the mess Soquel Creek Water District’s contractor is making in the Willowbrook neighborhood by using the public street as a construction staging area, when the District has paid Twin Lakes Baptist Church big money for a nearby parcel that sits empty, I recommended people contact Mr. Travis Rieber at County Public Works and inquire why this was being allowed.

Mr. Rieber replied to my inquiry, stating that “the temporary use of side parking” was approved by the County, although provided no documentation about that approval.  He did, however, provide a copy of the 55-page Encroachment Permit and construction location plans (See the attached document at the end of this blog).  Page 4 of the Permit Agreement specifically states:

“11. The County’s right-of-way shall not be used as a staging area. The Permittee and/or Contractor shall make arrangements for a construction staging area that is in conformance with all County land use and zoning regulations; to be verified through the County of Santa Cruz Planning Department.”

I suggest you also contact Mr. Rieber to find out why the County made an exception for Soquel Creek Water District, especially when there is a District-owned vacant lot nearby.  

Travis Rieber travis.rieber@santacruzcounty.us 

Why has Soquel Creek Water District been allowed to use the public street in Willowbrook neighborhoods as a construction staging area when the Encroachment Permit Agreement prohibits it, especially when their ratepayers have paid Twin Lakes Baptist Church $128,000 gifted 50-years of free water for irrigating the Church’s private school athletic fields and waived all Water Demand Offset fees for the Church’s new on-campus housing expansion (to the tune of $55,000/acre foot of new water demand)?

Below is the District’s empty lot…located adjacent to the Willowbrook neighborhood construction zone.  The District ratepayers also are paying Cabrillo College $5,760 annually with an additional $2,200 rent for a construction staging site.  (See Item 7.2 in May 18, 2021 agenda, Attachments 1 and 2)  Hmmmm…. 

SHOULD DRINKING WATER BE SO EXPENSIVE THAT PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY IT?

Water is necessary for life, so if the methods local water agencies, such as Soquel Creek Water District, choose to implement are so expensive that the cost to ratepayers for water is unaffordable…what happens? 

Consider that Soquel Creek Water District’s rates are the highest of any in the MidCounty area.  They approach being one of the highest in the State for the size of the customer base. (See attached water rate comparison at the end of this blog…many thanks to the reader who wishes to remain anonymous for supplying this information).  

Yet, the debt to build the expensive and energy-demanding PureWater Soquel Project continues to climb, with the District frantic to find additional public funds to keep it afloat.  

Think about this.  The District has no method to help people who get behind on their bills, other than a payment plan…or shutting off their water.  Santa Cruz City Water Rates are going to increase exponentially year after next.

What about customers on fixed incomes? 

It appears those ratepayers are not alone in facing extremely high water costs:

How San Diego secured its water supply, at a cost  

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION ABOUT WATER 

The County Grand Jury just released a report, “Our Water Account is Overdrawn”, spotlighting the issue of water supply for the County.  See pages 21-22 to review their findings.  More on this next week, but readers should also be aware that Santa Cruz County LAFCO Director Joe Serrano is working on a comprehensive “Sphere and Service Review” of all water agencies in the County, with a target of public release this August.

Grand Jury Water Report  

MOSS LANDING POWER PLANT WILL SOON BE GONE BUT ICONIC TOWERS WILL STAY

Thanks to my friend, Al, for sending this interesting information along.    Meanwhile, the Central Coast Community Power is still hoping to be 100% renewable energy by 2030, but needs more battery storage due to the glut of solar power generated on the grid that cannot be stored for night-time sales.

Once the source of large-scale pollution, Moss Landing is cleaning up.

A CANDIDATE THAT RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF FAMILY FARMS, HEALTHY SOILS AND POLLINATORS…REINETTE SENUM FOR GOVERNOR

 With so many choices on the ballot for June 7, this one merits consideration.

[Position paper]

[Postition paper – Spanish]

WORLD BEE DAY…NEVER TOO LATE TO HONOR

International Bee Day was May 20, but it is never too late to honor the importance of bees.

World Bee Day 
“In Slovenia, the country responsible for the World Bee Day initiative, beekeeping is a way of life. One out of every 200 people is a beekeeper, most of them amateurs. The Beekeeping Academy of Slovenia says the hobby teaches ‘responsibility, perseverance, modesty, hard work, love of nature and homeland.’ Plus, they get that honey. Now that’s something to buzz about.” 

\MAKE ONE CALL.  WRITE ONE LETTER.  READ ONE CHAPTER OF THE COUNTY’S DRAFT SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND REGULATORY UPDATE AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS.
MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY JUST DOING SOMETHING.

Cheers, Becky

May 23

GOOD CANDIDATE FORUMS
I attended last week’s South County Candidate Forum in Watsonville, along with about 35 other in-person and 45 online participants, and was really glad I did.  The five candidates seeking the new office of Assembly District 30, created by recent re-districting, were there, as well as the three candidates for County Supervisor District 4.

I was heartened to hear that most all candidates are focusing on the importance of water in our region, but the plan to solve it was simply “give this more money for infrastructure.”  I had hoped to hear more specific information about creative plans and projects.    

I had submitted questions for each panel in advance, as did many others, but somehow there seemed to be a glitch, and moderator Steve Bennett of the Sentinel “ran out of questions” without asking all that had actually been submitted.  Watsonville realtor Renee Mello pointed this out as she stood up and asked the County Supervisor candidates what they might do about allowing large empty commercial complexes, such as the K-Mart in Watsonville, and the Capitola Mall, to be converted to mixed use that would include housing units?  All said they would favor that, with study.  The balance of the time went to Measure D discussion.

Felipe Hernandez seemed to have the best grasp of the big issues, such as the proposed local control of the Watsonville Hospital, transportation issues, and local jobs.  I had a chance to talk with each of the candidates afterward.  Candidate Jimmy Dutra walked away when I asked why the Metro buses couldn’t run right now on the rail.  Felipe Hernandez and Ed Acosta felt it important to pursue.  These two candidates were interested in hearing more about possible historic preservation of the Redman-Hirahara House, the Mills Act that provides tax relief to those who preserve historic property, and the fact that the current County Board of Supervisors rejected a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance sent by their Historic Resources Advisory Commissioners that would protect historic structures from neglect.  

The next day when I happened to see Felipe Hernandez posting one of his campaign signs, he shook my hand and said he had researched the Mills Act and other historic preservation issues, and would fully support them if elected.  Bravo!

In terms of Assembly District 30 Candidates, Vicki Nordren was the only candidate to discuss the problems the CZU Fire Survivors are having in rebuilding.  Both she and candidate John Wizard agree that the permitting process really needs to be streamlined.  

The event was recorded by LookOut staff, but no link has yet been made public. 

Here is their report of the evening.

There was also an earlier North Santa Cruz County Candidate Forum held by the same sponsors (Santa Cruz Sentinel, Santa Cruz County Business Council, Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce, and Pajaro Valley Chamber of Commerce), but I was not able to participate.  Here is the link (thanks to LookOut) to that recorded forum: North Santa Cruz County Candidates Forum — Santa Cruz Works

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts.

LookOut provides this good collection of recorded video interviews with a wide range of candidates that we all see on our June 7 ballot.

COUNTY MOVES TO NEW VOTE CENTER MODEL

The June 7 Election will feature the County’s rollout of the new 17 Vote Centers, rather than the traditional neighborhood precinct polling places. Santa Cruz County will abide by the Draft Election Administration Plan (EAP), in compliance with the California Voter’s Choice Act (VCA), or Senate Bill (SB) 450 (Allen, 2016) that was signed into law on September 29, 2016, adding Section 4005 to the California Elections Code (EC).  This allowed counties, after receiving approval from their Board of Supervisors, to conduct any election by mail, with certain requirements. 

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors approved our county’s transition to a vote center model on March 22, 2022.

Here is what County Election Officer Tricia Weber stated in the Draft 

“At the time of preparing this EAP, Santa Cruz County is required to have a minimum of 17 votecenters open for four days, including Election Day, and 4 of those 17 vote centers open an additional seven days for a total of 11 days and a minimum of 15 mail ballot drop off locations. These minimum requirements are based on current voter registration totals and California Elections Code requirements. Voters may return their vote-by-mail ballot by mail (no postage required), at a ballot drop off location, or at any vote center.”

Do you think the Voter Centers are in good locations to help support voter participation and valid voting?    Contact info@votescount.org     See page 12 in the EAP for those locations and formulas for consideration, or on the County Election Dept. website: Voting Locations

Note that Watsonville is missing a four-day center except for the City Clerk’s Office.  That is because the Santa Cruz County Fairgrounds was going to require $17,000 for the use of facilities.  Election Dept. staff declined.  Consequently, Legal Staff from the State Dept. of Food & Ag, who oversees the State-owned Fairgrounds, paid a visit to their Board and reminded them that the State does not ever charge for election polling use.

ONLY 10% OF THE CZU FIRE SURVIVORS HAVE BEEN ISSUED PERMITS TO REBUILD AND CALFIRE IS THE GATEKEEPER
District 3 County Supervisor candidates need to be jumping into the arena to make public the real problems the CZU Fire Survivors are enduring…causing many to just give up, sell their land and move away.   Time after time, I hear from those who lost everything that the County’s “expedited Permit Recovery Center” is anything but easy to navigate.  Public meetings never include a CalFire presence, yet it is onerous requirements set by CalFire and the State Board of Forestry that are many times causing the block to getting a permit to rebuild homes…for which the property owners continue to pay tax.

Consider this: The Santa Cruz County Community Foundation launched the Fire Response Fund on Aug. 19, 2020, to address relief and long-term recovery efforts, giving more than $1.7 million to residents displaced by the fires. But, CEO Susan True said, “Rebuilding efforts have been stymied by excessive requirements and delays.”

“We have to help people heal and rebuild their lives. We’re doing that case by case, one by one, helping people through this process,” she said. “But there are clearly broken parts of the process, and the overwhelm of all of this is real.”

Santa Cruz County’s new CZU dashboard shows fewer than 10% have been issued rebuilding permits

What can you do to help?  Contact County District Supervisors Ryan Coonerty (he will remain in office until December 31, 2022 and should be doing something worth his salt) and Supervisor Bruce McPherson, and demand that the process be streamlined, permit fees dropped and CalFire show up at community meetings and be held accountable.

Ryan Coonertyryan.coonerty@santacruzcounty.us
Bruce McPhersonbruce.mcpherson@santacruzcounty.us

MAYBE A BETTER WAY TO MANAGE FIRE RISK? EXTEND BURN SEASON?
Would it be better to follow Native American land management practices and regularly burn some areas?  Maybe their intentions were different than what would be the benefit now, but nonetheless, the idea of “Good Fire” is coming full circle.  

UCI-led research recommends extending California’s prescribed burning season

Let’s hold hope that current consolidation efforts of the Branciforte Fire District with Scotts Valley Fire District to possibly include a “Good Fire” Training Hub will move forward.  Contact Scotts Valley Fire Chief Ron Whittle and ask for this.  831-438-0211.

By January 1, 2023, the State Fire Marshal must identify a location for such a training center. Why not Santa Cruz County?

MRI FOR THE EARTH’S GROUNDWATER BASIN SURVEYS
The State is paying for these helicopters to fly over and assess the status of the groundwater basins, especially the troubled ones.  Oddly, the Santa Cruz MidCounty Groundwater Basin Agency does not want this free help.  Why not?

In 2017, the Agency partners (Soquel Creek Water District, City of Santa Cruz Water Dept., Central Water District, and the County of Santa Cruz that represents small water companies and private well owners) paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to have this work done, hiring a Danish contractor to do the work.  Some of those staffers even got an expense-paid trip to Denmark to meet with the contractor.  Wow.

So, why would this agency now refuse the State’s offer to do the work for free, and get a better idea of the groundwater situation…maybe it has improved?  NO, says the agency staff, led principally by Soquel Creek Water District CEO Ron Duncan.  They want to wait until their PureWater Soquel Project is online and pressure-injecting treated wastewater into the groundwater, and then have the helicopter fly over.  

The truth is, the groundwater levels have been steadily improving since 2016, with one or two exceptions where they have just stabilized.  Why not see where the groundwater levels are now, before pressure-injecting treated sewage water …which may not even be necessary?

Maybe it would be found that the incredibly expensive and energy-demanding PureWater Soquel Project is not necessary?  Think about that.

‘MRI for the Earth’ Probes Groundwater from the Air in California – Tool is Able to Send Electromagnetic Signals 1,000 Feet into the Earth’s Subsurface  

JOBY AVIATION GOES BIG

Wow…and it all began in Bonny Doon….

Joby Acquires Avionyx — Santa Cruz Works

A MOMENT OF SILENCE AND GRATITUDE ON MEMORIAL DAY

According to the History.com website, each year on Memorial Day a national moment of remembrance takes place at 3:00 p.m. local time.  This commemoration began in 1868 to honor the 600,000-800,000 soldiers who died in the Civil War, with the first ceremony held on May 30 in Arlington National Cemetery where both Union and Confederate soldier were buried.

The tradition of having a moment of silence at 3pm local time to honor those fallen may have begun with an early Memorial Day commemoration organized by a group of formerly enslaved people paying tribute to the Union soldiers who gave their lives for the end of slavery.

Take a moment on May 30 and send gratitude for all those who have passed before us, their sacrifice, and for the good work done, the spirit of which is continually unfolding for our own efforts to preserve and enhance.

WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE ONE CALL.  ATTEND A VIRTUAL MEETING IN YOUR PAJAMAS.
JUST DO SOMETHING THIS WEEK, AND MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE!

Cheers, Becky

May 16

WHEN DOES WATER BECOME TOO EXPENSIVE?
Last week, the Coastal Commission rejected plans for a large desalination plant in Huntington Beach, California chiefly because the water would be too costly for the ratepayers, but also because of damage to marine life.  

Oddly, cost was also the chief concern of the Commissioners in March, 2020 when they approved the PureWater Soquel Project consolidated application.   They approved it anyway, even though Soquel Creek Water District staff could not even answer the question of “How much WILL that water cost?”

[Cal Am not fazed by rejection of SoCal desal]

Strangely, the Commission cared nothing about the contaminants in the brine effluent that the PureWater Soquel Project treatment plant in Live Oak will pump back to the outfall pipe into the Monterey Bay Sanctuary…containing more contaminants than the City’s wastewater effluent supplying the Project, due to disinfection by-products.

And don’t forget that the City’s outfall pipe has a known rupture about 65 feet offshore.

Write the California Coastal Commission and let them know your thoughts about this.  You can refer to Consolidated Development Permit 3-20-0014 approved on March 11, 2020.

You could also write the Santa Cruz City Council and ask when they plan to repair the rupture in the sewage water effluent pipe to make ocean waters healthier for surfers and folks at the beach.

citycouncil@cityofsantacruz.com 

Has Soquel Creek Water District done any studies to determine the impacts of their PureWater Soquel Project contaminated brine effluent on marine life?  NOPE.

Write their Board (which includes a number of scientists) and ask them to do this much-needed work.

Board of Directors for Soquel Creek Water District  bod@soquelcreekwater.org  

• Mail: Board of Directors, P.O. Box 1550, Capitola, CA 95010 
• District Office: Board of Directors, 5180 Soquel Drive, Soquel, CA 95073

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT RATES WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE
On May 3, the Board considered the 2022/2023 Budget.  It is sobering, largely due to the financial hemorrhage caused by the expensive PureWater Soquel Project.  

Even with the $59 million in government grants, in September 2020 the District had to take out a loan agreement of up to $89 million with the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) low-interest loan program administered by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

The District also had to take out a $75 million revolving line of credit with CoBank, ACB in July 2020 to provide cash flow while waiting for the various grant/loan program disbursements.

And more, much more, is needed.

Ratepayers have been conserving water so well that water sales are $2.3 million (12.48%) lower than projected in the finance plan for 2022/23, which effectively negates the 9% annual volumetric rate increases slammed upon customers for the past three years running. 

Monthly service charges are expected to generate $10.4 million in revenue, an increase of $1.1 million from the prior year, primarily as a result of the scheduled rate increase that took effect on January 1, 2022. 

In a depressing nutshell…..

“Ending reserves are projected to be lower than the previous year by over $2 million. As operating expenses increase, more money is allocated to the Operating Contingency Reserve. In addition, the cash flow gap between money going out for the PWS project and grant and loan reimbursements coming in has depleted the District’s cash reserves until such time as the project is completed and all funding has been recovered. It is expected that the District’s reserves will begin to rebound one to two years after PWS is completed. In the interim, this is an area to carefully monitor because it does inhibit the District’s ability to provide reserve cash flow for other gap financing or fiscal emergencies.”

(see page 11)

Meanwhile, the new Quail Run Buried Concrete Tank Project remains unbuilt in Aptos, even though the District borrowed money to build it.  

The District got $100,000 from the State for aid to customers who couldn’t pay their bills due to COVID, but there is no plan for ways that poor customers can apply for this help.  The District sold 66.5 Acre-feet in Water Demand Offsets at $55,000/Acre-foot (that’s a total of $3,657,500!!!).  Where is all that money going???  Hmmmm…..

WHY IS THE COUNTY ALLOWING SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT TO USE PUBLIC ROADS AS CONSTRUCTION STAGING SITES?
People who live on the Willowbrook Lane in Aptos have lost most of their much-needed on-street parking, thanks to Soquel Creek Water District’s construction project and the fact that for some reason (likely money), the County is allowing them to stockpile large equipment and supplies right on the public street.

What I want to know is why the District is impeding the public’s use of our thoroughfare by doing all this when they have a 50-year lease on a large parcel from Twin Lakes Baptist Church just down the way, and own a parcel next to the tennis courts at Willowbrook Park, both of which now sit empty. 

Take a look:

Empty Lot next to Cabrillo College Way at Twin Lakes Baptist Church

Soquel Creek Water District is using Willowbrook Lane as a construction staging area, prohibiting on-street parking on both sides of the street.

That’s a pile of asphalt…generally not allowed to be stockpiled on public streets and in the storm drain areas.

If you wonder about this, please contact Mr. Travis Rieber at County Public Works and ask how much (if anything) the County is getting paid to allow this to happen…and why.

Travis Rieber travis.rieber@santacruzcounty.us

WHY IS THE COUNTY POUNDING DENSITY MOSTLY INTO LIVE OAK AND NOT APTOS?
I took a deep breath and dove into the Draft EIR for the County Sustainability Plan and Regulatory Update, and began with Appendix C: Project Growth Assumptions Memorandum.  It’s 12 pages, and outlines how the areas targeted for extremely dense developments were chosen…sort of.  I feel Live Oak is going to be unfairly hit hard with high-density and the quality of life will change drastically for the worse.

Take a look at pages 5 and 6, showing that the economic forecasts (which will be mainly in the medical sector) are focused on mixed use development in the Live Oak area, increasing the ratio of housing vs. commercial to 75% residential (I think it is 50% now).  The industrial jobs got moved out of Live Oak and into South County; does that mean the morning commute will run the opposite direction as it does now?

Here is an interesting gem:

“The locations of these jobs were further refined to reflect mixed-use growth along main street corridors, multimodal corridors, and around future potential transit stations along the Santa Cruz Branch Line, as well as commercial growth in the medical uses around Soquel Drive, and job growth related to the new Workplace Flex (C-3) Zone District, which was assumed to locate around multimodal corridors and in focused areas such as the 41st Avenue/Soquel Drive and 17th Avenue/Santa Cruz Branch Line areas. 

Hmmmm…..

Take a look on pages 6 and 7 at the projected jobs for various areas of the County (according to AMBAG).  The numbers are high for Aptos, second only to Live Oak, but there is not much dense housing planned for Aptos.  How come?

The document is dated October 29, 2020….a bit stale, but shows you just how long Dudek Consultants have been grinding away on this Draft EIR.

Choose a topic that is of interest and meaningful to you, and dive in.

[CEQA Documents Open for Public Review]

Comments are due by May 31, 2022.  I think we should all be asking for MORE TIME!

Email EIR Comments here: CEQA-NEPA@santacruzcounty.us 

COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HOST PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNTY SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND REGULATORY UPDATES
The County noticed the public about this public hearing in the May 12 Santa Cruz Sentinel (Page A-2) but did not include the information about how to access the May 25 virtual Planning Commission hearing at 9:30am.  

Here is the link that might help a bit

However, the webinar ID is missing, so notify Ms. Stephanie Hansen stephanie.hansen@santacruzcounty.us  and ask that the full access information be posted and re-noticed in the Sentinel.  How can the public participate in this important Public Hearing about what our County will look like in the future if we can’t even access the hearing???

Keep checking here 

WOULD AN EMPTY HOMES TAX REALLY HELP PROVIDE AFFORDABLE RENTAL RELIEF?
With much discussion about a possible Empty Homes Tax in the City of Santa Cruz on this November’s ballot, it is worth researching whether or not such taxation has really helped other cities with their affordable housing problems.  The City of Vancouver is the textbook case, as well as Melbourne.  

According to this article, the cities have indeed collected a lot of money, but that has not helped provide much affordable housing relief.  

Taxing Rich Peoples’ Empty Homes Isn’t Helping the Housing Crisis?

What do you think?

RIO CAFE AND FLATS BISTRO IN RIO DEL MAR HAS NEW OWNERS

Many thanks to my friend, Al, let me know about this change….

“After decades of fun and good times with Cafe Rio and Flats Bistro, the time has come for me to retire! My long-time friends, Sean and Grace Venus, of Venus Spirits and Kitchen will be the new owners.” Jeanne aka Queenie

JUST SAY HELLO
Last week, I organized and /or attended four memorial gatherings. It was sobering. I think the big lesson is to see each day as a wonderful gift, and to greet others walking along the path of life with respect and friendliness. You just never know how much of a difference a friendly “Hello” might make….

MAKE ONE CALL. WRITE ONE LETTER. INSIST ON GETTING ACCESS INFORMATION TO ZOOM PUBLIC HEARINGS SO THAT YOU CAN PARTICIPATE.

MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK AND JUST DO SOMETHING…WITH A SMILE.

WHAT WOULD A ZERO ZONE LOOK LIKE…AND HOW WOULD IT BE ENFORCED?

New California Board of Forestry requirements are on their way, seeking to mandate that all structures in the fire risk areas have nothing combustible within 5′ of foundations and decks, and no plants taller than 2′ within 10′ of a structure, including decks.  You would have to cut down all shrubbery, and remove arbors and pergolas…and irrigate more, rather than less. 

This could go into effect as early as January, 2023 for new construction, and the following year for all others…but only if the Board of Forestry makes a finding that the Legislature has appropriated sufficient funding in the annual Budget Act for this purpose.   Isn’t that interesting?  Some jurisdictions have already put this general requirement on their books, but CalFire has not.

Last Wednesday, May 4, a Board of Forestry Working Group held a hybrid Zone Zero Workshop in Sacramento to publicly present proposed requirements that would comply with AB 3074, creating Ember Resistant Zones.  There were about 190 participants in the morning session, but it dwindled after lunch break.

Read about what AB 3074, signed into law by Governor Newsom on Sept. 29, 2020, requires.

Curious about how plastic deck lumber and artificial turf handle ember storms and wildfire?  It depends on wind and other fuels nearby, but in general they fare quite well if the product has a Standard Chapter 7A Fire Code rating.  Artificial turf, however, does not… because embers sit and smolder, then ignite later.
Take a look here at the deck testing results.

The speaker from the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS), Mr. Daniel Gorham, flew in from the east coast where the company lab is located.    

He referred to many studies of building material flame resistance when showered with embers from varying distances and durations.

You can contact him with your questions: Daniel Gorham DGGorham@ibhs.org 

No more half-wine barrel planters allowed on decks or near structures.

No discussion about how mountain folk who live on steep slopes could accomplish a non-combustible Zero Zone (i.e., concrete or bare dirt) and not really open up a Pandora’s Box with erosion.  

No discussion about where residents might get funding to help accomplish the clearing that could be required, some of which would require use of an expensive crane.

No discussion about whether utility companies and State Parks would also have to comply with these proposed requirements.  Hmmm……

You may find it of interest that some counties have already passed Ember Resistant Zone Ordinances, and require property owners who have fire hazards within 100′ of their neighbors to clean it up!  It is known as the “Good Neighbor” law, and Napa County is one of them, having approved this in 2019:

SECTION 2. Section 8.36.070 is hereby added to read in full as follows: 

8.36.070 – Ember resistance zone. For all new construction where the construction commences on or after the effective date of this section, the establishment and maintenance of an ember resistant zone within 5 feet of a structure is required. Distances may be increased by the enforcement officer based on site-specific 3 Ordinance No. 1467 analysis of local conditions.

SECTION 3. Section 8.36.080 is hereby amended to read in in full as follows: 

8.36.080 – Adjacent property owner’s responsibilities. When a structure is less than one hundred feet from a property line and prohibited materials on an adjacent parcel present a fire hazard for the structure, the property owner of the adjacent parcel where the fire hazard exists shall be responsible for clearing the area on that owner’s parcel that is within one hundred feet of the structure, so as to provide the necessary fire protection in the manner and to the extent required by the Napa County Defensible Space Guidelines. Distances may be increased by the enforcement officer based on site-specific analysis of local conditions. 

Defensible Space Ordinance

The good news is that CalFire has developed a standard curriculum to train Fire Defensible Space inspectors, and lay people could also get trained to help increase fire defensible space assessments (not technically “inspections” because those folks would have no legal enforcement power).  

Stay tuned to see what the Board of Forestry does next….and get your defensible space in order.

MAKE ONE CALL.  WRITE ONE LETTER.  ATTEND A ZOOM MEETING THIS WEEK AND ASK QUESTIONS.

MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK, AND JUST DO SOMETHING.

Cheers, Becky

May 2

RHNA NUMBERS TRIPLED…AMBAG’S PLAN OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT THROUGH JUNE 6 BUT WHERE IS IT?

Many thanks to my friend, Al, who let me know about the 45-day Public Comment period just opened by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) that somehow carries a big stick to require triple the number of housing units be built in our area within the next five years. [FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT RHNA
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA) OVERVIEW ]

Here is the Draft Regional Housing Number Allocation (RHNA) Plan

According to the website, there are the major changes proposed.

This is the 6th cycle for RHNA. What’s different this time?

Recent legislation resulted in the following key changes for this RHNA cycle:

• There is a higher total regional housing need. HCD’s identification of the region’s total housing needs has changed to account for unmet existing need, rather than only projected housing need. HCD now must consider overcrowded households, cost burdened households (those paying more than 30% of their income for housing), and a target vacancy rate for a healthy housing market (with a minimum of 5%).

• RHNA and local Housing Elements must affirmatively further fair housing. According to HCD, achieving this objective includes preventing segregation and poverty concentration as well as increasing access to areas of opportunity. HCD has mapped Opportunity Areas and has developed guidance for jurisdictions about how to address affirmatively furthering fair housing in Housing Elements. As required by Housing Element Law, AMBAG has surveyed local governments to understand fair housing issues, strategies, and actions across the region.

• There will be greater HCD oversight of RHNA. AMBAG must now submit the draft allocation methodology to HCD for review and comment. HCD can also appeal a jurisdiction’s draft allocation.

• Identifying Housing Element sites for affordable units will be more challenging. There are new limits on the extent to which jurisdictions can reuse sites included in previous Housing Elements and increased scrutiny of small, large, and non-vacant sites when these sites are proposed to accommodate units for very low- and low-income households.

What gives AMBAG such broad authority, and where do these RHNA number mandates come from? It is a tangled web.

“Under state law and the California Housing and Community Development (HCD) oversight, AMBAG must develop RHNA every eight years. This process begins with HCD providing a Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) for the Monterey and Santa Cruz counties. The regional determination includes an overall housing need number, as well as the percentage of units required in different income categories. AMBAG received its 6th Cycle Regional Housing Need Determination from HCD in August 2021. AMBAG released the Draft 6th Cycle RHNA Plan on April 22, 2022 for a 45-day public review period. The public review period closes on June 6, 2022. The Final 6th Cycle RHNA Plan is scheduled for adoption in fall 2022.”

The Draft RHNA Plan frequently cites the 2050 Plan Bay Area Blueprint, but it is not accessible to the public

Somehow, AMBAG created a non-profit, called RAPS, Inc to hire outside expensive consultants to feed them information and develop economic analysis that shapes the housing number mandates among the various jurisdictions.

What is RAPS, Inc.? Regional Analysis and Planning Services, Inc. (RAPS, Inc.) is the 501 c 3. non-profit arm of the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. RAPS, Inc. is governed by a Board of Director comprised of four AMBAG Executive Committee members and three public at large representatives—one from each County.

I wonder who they are? The Board only meets once a year, in June. The link to the 2021 agenda brings up the 2019 agenda, but shows the last names of the Directors (I recognize County Supervisor Bruce McPherson’s name). The 2020 agenda does not provide that information.

The RAPS, Inc. Board is provided information by expensive consultants to help determine potential economic growth projections, and what infrastructure will be needed to support it. How bizarre.

For more information about this program, contact Ana Flores by email at aflores@ambag.org or phone: (831) 883-3750

Regional Housing Planning | Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments

What if we just said NO?

Some California cities paid no attention to what their Regional Government strong-arms said, and created policies that reflected what was best for their community. What happened? Governor Newsom requested the State Attorney General to file a lawsuit against the City of Huntington Beach for not meeting their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirement. The City lost in court, and chose not to appeal it because it would not be productive to do so.

Huntington Beach loses housing case with state of California

Housing Element Compliance One Pager

What a mess.

SOME CITIES ARE LEGALLY CHALLENGING THE STATE OVER SB 9
Four Southern California cities are fighting back to maintain local land use control for quality of life in their communities, and have filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claiming the law is unconstitutional, and demanding an injunction.

Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill (SB) 9 last September, introduced by Senate leader Toni Atkins, despite receiving letters of protest from 240 cities as well as from the League of California Cities. It allows single family residential parcels to be split in two and have a total of four units, and approval is ministerial.

Imagine how water use, parking and traffic would change in your neighborhood if everyone chose to do this.

“By enacting SB 9, the state “eviscerated a city’s local control over land use decisions and a community-tailored zoning process,” the legal complaint states.

Companion legislation includes Senate Bill 7, signed in May, which exempts small housing projects from some environmental reviews, and Senate Bill 10, signed concurrently with Senate Bill 9, that lets a local government rezone single-family parcels to allow as many as 10 units near public transit hubs and within urban areas.

Keep your eye on the legal challenges in Southern California…and write your elected representatives with your thoughts on the matter.

STATE WANTS TO CONTROL HOW LOCAL TRANPORTATION TAX MONEY IS SPENT
As if the “big stick’ legislation around housing is not enough to cause major headaches, the State legislature is now attempting to mandate how local jurisdictions use local revenues for transportation projects.

From the weekly newsletter from the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)

Bill of the Week: Assembly Bills 2237 and 2438 (Friedman) – Transportation Project Funding Restrictions

RCRC, in partnership with several local government and local transportation agency associations, has expressed strong opposition to Assembly Bills 2237 and 2438, both authored by Assembly Member Laura Friedman (D – Burbank), who is chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee. Combined, the bills impose several new requirements on local transportation agencies, and authorize state agencies to restrict funding to local transportation agencies, if those local agencies plan and implement projects that are not deemed to advance state or regional climate goals. Read More

Additionally, AB 2237 would also require each regional transportation planning agency or county transportation commission to submit a report on local transportation tax measures to the California Transportation Commission on or before March 30, 2023. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with the state board, to propose recommendations on alignment of local tax measures with the state’s climate goals.

Both bills passed their respective Assembly policy committees, including the Assembly Transportation Committee, and are before the Assembly Appropriations committee for further consideration.

From the web site: California State Association of Counties. Under laws pertaining to Legislative tracking:

Housing, Land Use and Transportation= one of perhaps 175 laws in this category

Please contact your elected representatives with your thoughts about this.

WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED SANTA CRUZ COUNTY GENERAL PLAN CHANGES?

The Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the changes to building densities and infrastructure to handle it is now open for public comment. Please attend the virtual public hearing next Monday, May 9, at 6pm to help get an idea of how to address this massive study by Dudek Consultants that has been years in the making.

Public comment period ends May 31.

Please submit any comments to CEQA-NEPA@santacruzcounty.us

Consider also writing Planner Stephanie Hansen (stephanie.hansen@santacruzcounty.us> and Matt Machado <matt.machado@santacruzcounty.us>, who now directs both the County Planning Dept. and the Dept. of Public Works, and ask for a 30-day extension if you think this merits more careful examination by the public. I sure do!

GLOBAL INITIATIVES GOVERN LOCAL LAND USE?
Last week, the State of California and Together Bay Area released a list of projects to fulfill Governor Newsom’s “30 by 30 Plan” to require 30% of California be in a conservation agreement by 2030. It seems that is a global policy, supported by the Biden administration, and new strategies released last week outline how it will be done.

Curious about what projects are identified for Santa Cruz County? Take a look at a few of the 18 projects earmarked for $150 million in funding, using the $700 million in State money to fund 110 projects statewide over the next 3-5 years:

• Santa Cruz Mountains Redwoods Acquisition…$11million to buy private land…maybe force the CZU Fire Survivors who can’t get permits to sell instead?
• Protecting the Santa Cruz Sandhills…$2-$10 million to add hundreds of acres in new real estate transactions
• Santa Cruz Mountains Forest Restoration and Resiliency…$2-$10 million to restore CZU Fire habitats
• South County Parkland Acquisition and Development…$2-$10 million to purchase 40 acres near the Santa Cruz County Fairgrounds by Santa Cruz County Parks Dept.
• Cotoni-Coast Dairies Trail Development…$2-$10 million to build 19 miles of new trails
• Moran Lake County Park Restoration and Access Plan…$2-$10 million to improve pollinator, hummingbird and Monarch Butterfly habitat
• The Farm Park Phase 2…$2-$10 million for further improvements

Watsonville Slough Farm Community Harvest Trails…$2-$10 million to create U-Pick farms and orchards on this 500-acre farm near Pajaro Valley High School, with a community center with food prep area, and Lee Road pedestrian bridge and trail. Plans are in hand, permits in process, and construction will start in 2023.

There are others:

Read about the fact that this is part of a global plan here:

Marin eyes new open space projects to complete by 2030

HOW LOW CAN YOU GO? PROPOSED LAW REDUCES PER CAPITA INDOOR WATER USE STANDARD STATEWIDE

Santa Cruz County residents have been some of the most conservative water users in the State, but will likely soon be required to use even less.

Last week, the State Senate voted 28-9 to lower the current daily indoor water use limit from the current 55 gallons/person to 47 gallons, starting in 2025, and to lower that daily amount to 42 gallons/person in 2030.

This would intensify the amount and timeline of State-mandated per capita daily indoor water use, changing the current 55 gallons/person amount set in 2018 by AB 1668 and SB 606, that would have lowered the limit ot 52.5 gallons/person in 2025 and to 50 gallons/person in 2030.

That legislation also specified penalties on local water suppliers for violations to these standards. Starting in 2027, local water suppliers’ failure to comply with the Board’s adopted long-term standards would have resulted in fines of $1,000 per day during non-drought years, and $10,000 per day during declared drought emergencies and certain dry years.

California AB 1668 – Water Management Planning | Adaptation Clearinghouse

For the first time ever, several large water municipalities in Southern California are imposing mandatory water conservation on a total of 6 million customers whose water supply is dependent on the Atate Water Project Aqueduct. The State will impose penalties of $2,000/Acre-foot for aggregate water use exceeding allotments. Residents are now limited to watering lawns once a week. Keep in mind that during the last drought, Southern California water use increased overall because conservation was not required.

Given that, 13 million residents in Southern California will not be affected by the limit because their water comes from the Colorado River. I wonder if they will conserve water? It is a much harsher climate there than our coastal paradise, and I hope for the best.

Two laws in 2018 required water agencies to develop a water budget by 2020 that would allow each person in the state to use a maximum of 55 gallons daily. But there was no real way for those agencies to gather per-capita data to submit to the State Water Board, other than an aggregate estimate, based on total water use.

SURF PARKS IN PALM SPRINGS?
Do you think it makes sense to build multiple large outdoor surf parks in the California desert? Developers say “YES!”, even though drought and water restrictions for agriculture in the area are significant.

Palm Springs water needs are supplied by the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River, both of which are over-taxed. However, the local water officials claim there is sufficient water for the next 20 years to support the San Jose-based Global Industry Analysts, Inc. market research plan to build multiple large resorts and outdoor wave pools.

(This sounds like someone Swenson Developers would hire, doesn’t it?)

One such development, Coral Mountain, is already under construction in nearby La Quinta, and includes a 400-acre subdivision of 600 new homes, hotel and retail outlets flanking a new half-mile-long artificial outdoor wave resort.

According to the CM Wave Development President, the surf park will not use potable water, and would require 8 to 10 times less water than a golf course. Does that make sense to you?

“With the evaporation and the wind and everything that is going to happen…,” said Alena Callimanis, a member of the group La Quinta Residents for Responsible Development, “the optics of this are just crazy.”

Surge of desert surf parks stirs questions in dry California

I couldn’t agree more.

WORK CONTINUES AT SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION SITE IN AN UNCONTROLLED DUST CLOUD
Last week while passing by the construction site next to the County Sheriff Center on Soquel Avenue near Chanticleer Avenue, I noticed a large dust cloud. This is where Soquel Creek Water District is building the PureWater Soquel Project treatment plant to prepare treated sewage water to inject into the aquifer.

There is potential for asbestos in this soil, due to past construction staging by other projects, and an old house there that was demolished. No dust control? The winds blow straight toward Highway One, and on to Dominican Hospital clinical areas. Hmmm….

Call the Monterey Bay Air Quality District if you ever see this happening: Submit a Complaint

We will all breathe easier if you do.

SPEAKING OF MESSY CONSTRUCTION SITES…APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT CONTINUES

Traffic continued to be snarled by the road construction in Aptos Village.

I wonder if the guy in the trench knew the soils are contaminated?

NATIONAL WILDFIRE PREPAREDNESS WEEK

This week is National Wildfire Preparedness Week. Take a moment to find one thing you can do around your home that would help save it in a wildfire ember storm. Here are some simple, clear suggestions that won’t overwhelm you

I would like to give public recognition to the County’s FireWise Communities and Santa Cruz County FireSafe Council for the work they are doing to help reduce wildland fire risk in neighborhoods throughout our County, and to concurrently acknowledge National Wildfire Community Preparedness Day (May 7).

The value of the National Fire Prevention Association’s (NFPA) FireWise Community Program in reducing wildfire risk in rural and Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) areas is well-recognized, even by some insurance providers. Last year’s Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Report encouraged support for more FireWise Communities in the WUI flanking the City of Santa Cruz (R4 on page 14).

There are now 27 FireWise Communities in Santa Cruz County, with more organizing.

Here is a list of the FireWise Communities in Santa Cruz County

Here is information from the NFPA about May 7 National Wildfire Community Preparedness Day

Is there one near your home? If not, consider organizing with your neighbors to get one going.

MAKE ONE CALL. WRITE ONE LETTER. COMMENT ON WAY-TOO-DENSE HOUSING MANDATES AND THE COUNTY EIR ENCOURAGING IT.
MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY JUST DOING SOMETHING.

Cheers and Happy Mother’s Day,

Becky

April 25

WILL THERE BE 200′ TALL BUILDINGS IN FUTURE DOWNTOWN SANTA CRUZ?  MAYBE!

Last Wednesday (4/20), a small crowd of people visited the Kaiser Arena for an in-person Open House look at what could be coming to that area of Santa Cruz.  Some, including me, were shocked to see that all versions of the plan include 100% demolition of existing structures in the area from the River to the base of Depot Hill and beyond, replacing it with a large permanent Warriors Arena surrounded by buildings as high as 200′ tall.  Wow.  

It was really great to have an in-person meeting, be able to look at the renderings and have a real discussion with staff on the spot.  A continuously-looped video greeted people, welcoming us to “The Zone”.  We were given colorful index card Post-its to share our comments on an easel placed next to the various stations that included Sustainability, Traffic and Circulation, Development, Housing, and more.   I saw what I suspected were some early staff-seeded Post-its that said “I love this new high-density!” but as the evening progressed, I also saw “Santa Cruz is NOT Oakland or San Francisco!”  

When I asked the staff about the parking space for the proposed new permanent arena, he said “well, there will be a little bit at the site, but mostly it will be spread out in the area.”  Hmmm…I wonder if this is related to the City’s zeal for a new downtown parking garage?  Another station discussion illuminated that staff is trying to decide where to position the very-high-rise buildings…near the River, in the middle of and next to the historic district?  How about “none of the above”?  When I asked about liquefaction concerns, staff basically shrugged and said it would all be engineered.  Water supply?  No problem.

“I just don’t like it!” I heard a man say, having asked about bike routes and secure bike parking, but I recognized a number of big developers roaming about with big smiles.  

Take a look at the attached photos I took.  Send your comments in now to Ms. Sara Neuse: sneuse@cityofsantacruz.com

[City of Santa Cruz – Downtown Plan Expansion ] Make sure to scroll to the bottom to read the “Real Estate Markets in Santa Cruz” study.

In case you haven’t been downtown recently, here is a photo of the seven-story development currently underway in the area nearby…

DRAFT EIR FOR SUSTAINABLE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY DEVELOPMENT NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
Start wading into this important document now and submit your comments before May 31, 2022.  Public comment on this Draft EIR ends on May 31, 2022, at 5 pm. Please submit any comments to CEQA-NEPA@santacruzcounty.us

Planning Department – CEQA – Environmental Documents Open for Public Review

The only virtual public meeting for this is scheduled for May 9, at 6:30pm

Do what you can to read any amount of the Draft EIR and Draft County General Plan / Sustainable Santa Cruz County Plan if you care at all about what the quality of life here will be in the future. 

NEW STATE FIRE DEFENSIBLE SPACE REGULATIONS WORKSHOP
If you live in rural areas and urban areas near rural spots, you need to pay attention to the new fire defensible space regulations coming down the pike. 

The State Board of Forestry will hold a hybrid Workshop on May 4, 9am-3pm, to discuss and take comment on the Changes to Fire Defensible Space Codes: Implementing Zone Zero.  The event is free, but the deadline to sign up is May 2.

 Specifically, AB 3074 (2020) directed the Board to establish a 0-5 foot “ember resistant” zone around structures adding to the existing two-zone defensible space system that requires fuel and vegetation management out to 100 feet from the structure. 

[Here is a link to the flyer]

The Board of Forestry will hold a Full Board meeting on May 5, beginning at 9am and is also a hybrid format.    You can click on the May 2022 Notice and Agenda and find information.

Note there is legal action on the Closed Session regarding the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) taking action against the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection.  The RCRC has been a strong advocate for rural property owners and continues to participate in the Board’s Draft Emergency Fire Safe Regulations process.

1. RCRC vs. Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (Case No. 22CECG00123)

Here is a link to the proposed but not-yet approved Draft Fire Safe Regulations that will make it economically unfeasible for many in the CZU Fire areas to get CalFire approval to rebuild:

Why isn’t Santa Cruz County one of the 39 rural county members in the RCRC??  People who have asked County staff were told there just isn’t money for that.  Hmmm….

DON’T BE FOOLED INTO THINKING THAT MEASURE B WILL REALLY FUND ANYTHING RELATED TO FIRE PROTECTION
Local Measure B is overshadowed by discussions of other high-visibility transportation issues, but don’t let yourself get fooled into supporting the County CAO’s deceptive plan to increase the General Fund with unfair increases to the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) This is the tax people pay when they come to visit the area and rent a hotel / motel room, or a vacation rental, or a room in a resident’s home for a short time.  

Measure B wants you to vote on whether to increase that tax on hotel/motel rooms by 1% and increase hosted room rentals and vacation rentals at a higher rate, 3%.  I have met many of the hosted room rental folks, often widows who need to sometimes rent out a room in their home for a few days to get enough money for medical bills or to pay property taxes.  They would have to increase what they charge at a much higher rate than would the large hotel corporations.  Is that fair?  The CAO is seeking to capitalize on neighborhood complaints related to vacation rental problems…but what exactly would an increase in the TOT revenues do to address those issues?  There is no plan and no guarantee that it would.

Once again, the County Board of Supervisors and CAO want to fool you into thinking this money would fund fire protection, the very same trick they used in 2018 for a countywide half-cent sales tax increase, known as Measure G.  In fact, the language in the two ballots is nearly identical.

To date, ZERO dollars from Measure G has funded fire protection.

Don’t be fooled again because the Board of Supervisors is not holding the CAO accountable for how Measure G funds are spent, and it is unlikely they would do anything differently with Measure B revenues. Please vote NO on Measure B this June.   

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT CONTINUES TO DRILL WELLS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PUBLIC ROADWAYS
Traffic on Kennedy Drive in Capitola is restricted to controlled one-way travel as Soquel Creek Water District continues drilling yet another well in the middle of the public roadway for the plan to inject treated sewage water into the pristine aquifer. 

https://www.sccoplanning.com/PlanningHome/Environmental/CEQAInitialStudiesEIRs/CEQADocumentsCOPY.aspx 

These types of well locations are cheaper than paying land owners, like Cabrillo College, money for easements, but what will it do to the integrity of the publicly-maintained roadways??

Meanwhile, the empty lot the City of Santa Cruz kicked Food Not Bombs out of in order to provide a construction staging area for Soquel Creek Water District’s plan to attach their large pipe holding pressurized treated sewage water laden with toxic chloramine to the Laurel Street Bridge sits completely empty…except for the ironic portable toilet.

And thanks to last week’s wind blowing the construction fabric over the fence at the site next to the County Sheriff Headquarters on Soquel Avenue, we can take a look at the status of the treatment plant project site where incredibly noisy and high energy-demand treatment plant will be.  Modifications to the PureWater Soquel Project have required the energy demand triple from the original guess made in the 2018 EIR the District’s Board certified. 

LARGEST POWER BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY IN THE WORLD IN MOSS LANDING
Large energy-hog projects like the Modified PureWater Soquel Project as well as the City and County’s high-rise, high-density plans will all place enormous demands for energy.  Right in time is the installation of the world’s largest battery storage facility just across the Bay.  Hopefully, more photovoltaic panels will become required for all new development to help offset demands, and the power can be stored locally.

[East Bay Times article]

Wouldn’t it be a good idea to require solar panels on all new development?

WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE ONE CALL.  READ ONE CHAPTER OF THE DRAFT COUNTY SUSTAINABILTY PLAN AND EIR AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENT. 

MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY JUST DOING SOMETHING.

Cheers, Becky

DEVELOPING SOUTH OF LAUREL WEDNESDAY APRIL 18.

I happened to see the notice below in today’s (April 18) Santa Cruz Sentinel Classified Ads (page B4). Please note that the website provided in the notice is not valid. Here is a working link, complete with a video of Donna Meyers describing a new permanent home for the Warriors, and providing economic vitality.

Join City Planning staff for a first look at draft options for how the area south of Laurel Street might redevelop over the coming decades.  Ask questions, provide feedback, and participate in shaping the future of downtown Santa Cruz!  

WHAT: Open House for Downtown Expansion-South of Laurel
WHEN: Wednesday, April 20th, 5:00-8:00pm Drop in any time!
WHERE: Kaiser Permanente Arena, 140 Front Street

CALFIRE ILLEGALLY REFUSING TO GRANT BUILDING PERMITS FOR CZU FIRE SURVIVORS?
I have heard a disturbing number of stories from people trying to rebuild in the CZU Fire areas that CALFIRE is requiring access improvements that will be required by new Board of Forestry Fire Safe Regulations, but that are not yet signed into law.   Is that legal?? 

Compliance with these demands will be so expensive, many may not ever be able to afford them…and could be prohibited from rebuilding.

Many of the 911 CZU Fire Survivors who lost their homes in that blaze are now at the mercy of CALFIRE to get approval to rebuild their homes.  It is a bitter pill to swallow, since many of those Survivors feel CALFIRE abandoned them in the fire, and even made it more difficult for those who stayed behind to protect and save their neighborhoods.

  I wanted to verify the status of the Board of Forestry Fire Safe Regulations.  The website is abysmal to navigate, but I found nothing.  Because the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) has been an outstanding advocate throughout the hearings related to this issue, I contacted their legislative staff member, Ms. Tracy Rhine, describing what is happening in the CZU Fire area.  Here is her response:

The proposed changes to the Fire Safe regulations are in limbo at the moment. The discussion on the latest revised version was tabled at the March meeting and is not agendized for discussion in April. According the BOF staff, they are still working on making revisions in response to the comments received during the 45-day public comment period.

Additionally, the emergency fire safe regulations expired the beginning of March – so – the current rules in force are those that were in effect in 2020 before the emergency regulations were adopted (the emergency regulations were narrow and provided exemptions from the rules for Accessory Dwelling Units and rebuilds of home lost due to wildfire). In our opinion, those exemptions were not necessary because the standards only apply inside the parameter of the property (for most road standards) for construction on (pre-1991) existing roads. Its more complex than that – but that is the bottom line. What approvals are being held from Calfire? Structural approval?

There is nothing in the law that should at all stop rebuilding/construction. The law is as it was in 2019. Nothing has changed, except that there is a moratorium on BOF issuing certification of ordinances – but that is not necessary, and, Santa Cruz, I believe has previously certified ordinances (or defers to the state fire regs? I’m not familiar as they are not an RCRC member). Tracy Rhine, RCRC.

 So, why is CALFIRE now imposing requirements that are not yet codified into law?   Why isn’t Santa Cruz County a member of the RCRC?   

Write your County Board of Supervisors and ask. 

WHY DID THE COUNTY GIVE THOSE 12 FREE COVID TRAILERS TO PARKS & REC?
The County emptied 12 new trailers of the transitional youth that had been staying in them for COVID, and gave them all to County Parks & Recreation ….for possible office space for programs to serve low-income families.  OFFICE SPACE, at a time when housing is desperately needed by many, including the CZU Fire Survivors????

When COVID hit in 2020, the State of California gifted 12 brand-new travel-trailers to Santa Cruz County for the purpose of providing living quarters for foster and transitional youth to stay in and isolate.  The trailers first went to the Seventh Day Adventist Camp in Soquel, then were moved to the lower Cabrillo College Campus parking lot near the Sheriff sub-station. 

Now they are all gone. 

I asked Chair of the County Board of Supervisors, Manu Koenig, about the fate of those trailers.  Here was his response:

The trailers were transferred to the Parks Department after the Cabrillo site closed. Parks has plans to use the trailers for a mix of programs at different locations, including programming for low-income individuals and families.

I have requested the Board of Supervisors to allocate the trailers to housing the CZU Fire Survivors as they rebuild.  Those folks have to get a permit from the County’s Recovery Permit Center (part of the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience or “OR3”) to put such a trailer on their own land during the permitting process.  That’s onerous, in my opinion, but in the event people can’t get that blessing, they most certainly could find other places, such as the Santa Cruz County Fairgrounds RV Site, to be while wrangling permits and construction.  

Please write the County Board of Supervisors and request these 12 like-new trailers be used for housing CZU Fire Survivors in need.

e-mail the entire Board:  BoardOfSupervisors@santacruzcounty.us

or contact them individually, using the template of first name .. dot ..  last name @santacruzcounty.us

Not sure who your County Supervisor is?  Check here: Board of Supervisors

And…what happened to the youth that had been living in those COVID trailers when the County’s money for the program ended? 

PAJARO VALLEY HEALTH CARE TRUST MEETINGS YOU CAN ATTEND AND ASK QUESTIONS

We all need to be watching how the new non-profit known as the Pajaro Valley Health Care District will work, and where the money is coming from now, and where it will come from in the future if the group buys the Watsonville Community Hospital.  

Last Tuesday’s County Board of Supervisor meeting included an update…$15.5 million is still needed to complete the purchase.  The seller is charging $2.5 million each month to hold the purchase agreement for the non-profit.  The County Board of Supervisors already allocated $5.5 million to this project; of that, $5 million will be used to pay the exorbitant monthly purchase agreement hold fees.   Not bad for a company when it is supposedly bankrupt.   The County will donate the time County Counsel spends doing some of the necessary legal work. 

All this, and not considering how the non-profit will obtain the required operational revenues if the purchase goes through?  Listen to the staff report on the video of the Item #7 update to the Board

Many thanks to Clerk of the Board Stephanie Cabrera, who subsequently provided the link to the Pajaro Valley Heath District Trust Board meetings:

Tune in this Thursday, April 21 at 5pm and participate. 

FIRST DISTRICT TOWN HALL MEETING WAS LIVELY

Nearly 40 local residents attended the First District Supervisor’s Town Hall Hybrid Meeting at Happy Valley School last Thursday (4/14).  I was mistaken in reporting last week that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the impending Branciforte Fire District dissolution.  That was not really discussed at all, and in fact, questions about it were fielded to the Fire District Board President Pat O’Connell for outside discussion. 

 What the group did discuss at length was the Jet Noise inaction and EIR (soon to expire), horror stories from residents trying to work with the County Planning Department, and the HomeKey Project on 2838 Park Avenue in Soquel.

A few participants were representing the Subec Lane and Lindsey Lane developments across from the proposed 2838 Park Avenue Homekey Project, making it clear that the lack of parking included in the proposed Project (1/3 space for each of the 36 units) will likely cause problems for their under-parked neighborhood. Many people in the audience, some who work in construction, are upset that the 2838 Park Avenue project was shoved through quickly, without environmental review that other projects are required to have, especially being in a riparian habitat.  They pointed out the units will be prefabricated elsewhere (providing few, if any, local jobs) and installed to become a three-story structure with balconies,  

Supervisor Manu Koenig informed the group that the Project applicant is working out a shared parking agreement with the commercial land owner adjacent that will allow the use of four spaces during the day, and the full use of the commercial parking lot after business hours. 

Will the State award this controversial new-construction project a Project Homekey grant?    The County applied for a $13.5 million grant. 

Generally, those monies have been awarded to purchasing hotels and motels that were used during COVID isolation programs for homeless under Project Roomkey for conversion to permanent housing programs. 

Take a look at the recent round of grant awards

Learn more about this Homekey Program here:

Awards Dashboard | Homekey

What seems to have gone wrong in Soquel is that the public affected, like the Subec and Lindsey Lane communities were not informed or involved, and the lack of environmental review seems completely unfair.

COUNTY DRAFT SUSTAINABILITY PLAN WOULD ALLOW HISTORIC PRESERVATION BUT WITH NO TEETH
Last week’s public meeting to review the Draft County Sustainability Plan regarding agriculture, open space and cultural preservation was disappointing.  There is nothing changing, except vague language that could be interpreted to preserve historic structures IF there were support from the County do so in at some point in the future.  No, the new County Code will NOT include a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance that would require owners of historically-significant properties to at least protect them from chronic decay and demolition by neglect.    

(see page 5-128)

Now, apply this to the Redman-Hirahara Farm in Watsonville.  The property is on the National Historic Registry, yet the County does nothing to make the owners, Elite Development owned by the Tut family, to even tarp the roof of this once-grand home designed by William Weeks.  Redman Hirahara Farmstead – Wikipedia

The Board of Supervisors refused to approve the County Historic Resources Commission’s recommendation to adopt a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance three years ago that would require the building be protected from neglectful demolition. There is also no improvement to the County’s Significant Tree Ordinance…only stating they should be saved “as practicable”. (ARC 1.1 page 5-30

It also removes the language requirement to preserve  the Deer Park Center’s Orchard (see page 5-30, ARC 5.14.4)

I had worried this orchard would be one of the 23 parcels the County staff announced earlier to be re-zoned, but it is not.   Here is that list

You can view last week’s public meeting discussing all this and more here: Sustainability Update Community Meeting#4: Agriculture, Resources, Public Facilities [April 12, 2022]

This week’s public meeting regarding this massive undertaking will review Code Modification and Map Amendments,

and  is scheduled for Wednesday, April 20 and is virtual-only.   

DRAFT EIR FOR SUSTAINABLE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY PLAN AND CODE MODERNIZATION GENERAL PLAN UPDATE NOW AVAILABLE

We will have 45 days to comment on this enormous Draft EIR document. 

(scroll down to the Sustainable Santa Cruz County Plan)    

Public Comment ends May 31 at 5pm.   Mark your calendar to participate in the May 9, 2022 public meeting, #6 of the line-up  

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CAO PALACIOS IS PAID MORE THAN PRESIDENT BIDEN?
Back in the reign of Susan Mauriello as County Administrative Officer, she enacted magnificent salary increases for herself and top level County managers.  Her successor, Carlos Palacios, has kept all those wonderful salaries intact, including his own, most of them surpassing that of the U.S. President salary.

Carlos makes more than President of the United States in salary.2

Many thanks to my friend, Al, for sending the information below.  I believe the source is Transparent California: 

US Presidents’ Salaries During and After Office

WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE ONE CALL.  ASK AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AND DON’T STOP ASKING UNTIL THEY DO AND YOU ARE SATISFIED. 

MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY JUST DOING SOMETHING, HOLDING GOVERNMENT LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE AND INSISTING ON TRANSPARENCY.

Cheers, Becky