CALL the Santa Cruz County District Attorney 454-2400 and demand an investigation into the travesty that the Aptos Village Project developers are showing nothing but disrespect for the significant Native American archaeological site CA-SCR-222 and the people of Aptos.

What does County Supervisor Zach Friend have to say?  When I asked him, he replied “Well, you know that the State has declared that (archaeologic) site as insignificant, don’t you?”  When I fact-checked that statement with Native American observer Ms. Anne Marie Sayers, she wondered where Mr. Friend got his information because CA-SCR-222 is considered significant.  

I wrote Supervisor Friend to ask for his sources….stay tuned, but don’t hold your breath because he rarely responds.  As for the Planning Department,  Historic Resources Commisision staffperson, Ms. Annie Murphy, still has not answered any questions directed to her at the May 12 Aptos Village Project public hearing on the matter.  Are you surprised?  I’m not.

You can research the issues yourself at: http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/planning/plnmeetings/PLNSupMaterial?Historic/agendas/2009/20090409/006.pdf

And  http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/planning/plnmeetings/PLNSupMaterial/Historic/agendas/2009/20090813/006.pdf

You can learn more about Native American Notification Law SB18 at:

https://www.opr.ca.gov/s_localandtribalintergovernmentalconsultation.php

And remember, the Historic Resources Preservation Plan for the Aptos Village Project expired on January 19, 2014.  Under Santa Cruz County Code, that means that NONE of the construction activity there is legal.  Think about that for a moment, and decide what you want to do about it.

APTOS VILLAGE WAS A DUST BOWL LAST WEEK.
My neighbor, a compliance officer for a large construction company, stopped by my house last week to show me a video he took of Collier Co. Workers grinding pavement in the Aptos Village road construction area.  There was no dust control…and I could barely see the traffic control worker in the enormous dust cloud issuing forth.  “See that!” my neighbor exclaimed, “OSHA needs to see that because those guys have no dust control measures and are not wearing any masks to protect their lungs!”  Apparently, the silica and contaminants in the dust are quite carcinogenic.   Now, isn’t that lovely?

So when the Collier workers started mechanically sweeping, and ultimately leaf-blowing the dust toward the group of protesters in the area the next day, we wanted Collier to stop and improve their dust control measures.  No luck.  The Collier  foreman told me he did not want to talk with me.  The main contractor (John Madonna Construction) foreman told me to “get out of here” and “go away”, then called the sheriff.  

The Collier foreman told Deputy Solano that “leaf blowers and brooms are a form of dust contol”.  How can that be?  I am glad I video-recorded the dense cloud wafting over the man waiting at the bus stop.  I think OSHA will be interested.

WORK ON VALENCIA ROAD REPAIR BEGAN THIS WEEK.
There still is no temporary bridge being installed over Valencia Creek, as Supervisor Zach Friend told the Valencia Elementary School staff and students, as well as adjacent Folling Green Estates residents, would happen once repair work got started.

My suspicions that the Valencia Road repair is being stalled in order to make life easier for the Barry Swenson Builder crews and the County project to upgrade things on Soquel Drive and Trout Gulch Road were given evidence this week.  While John Madonna Construction was working on demolishing the sidewalk along the Trout Gulch Crossing structures to benefit the Aptos Village Project developers, Barry Swenson Builder crews were tearing up Trout Gulch Road to install the new storm sewer pipeline from the development to Valencia Creek.  All of this work is so much easier without the Valencia Elementary School and local rural through-traffic.

I just think it is interesting that Supervisor Friend has stated that the temporary bridge will not go in until mid-July….just as the Aptos Village road project ends.  Handy, don’t you think?  Remember that the Fish & Wildlife rep. Said she was puzzled as to why no work had begun on Valencia earlier….the project had the okay from her agency a long time ago.  Hmmmm…..

COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OKAY EMBATTLED APTOS/LA SELVA FIRE CHIEF JONES TO OVERSEE THE COUNTY BUDGET AND TREASURY.
Second District Supervisor Zach Friend said he felt okay approving Chief Jones to continue as an alternate representing Special Districts as part of the County Budget and Treasury Oversight Commission because, as alternate, Chief Jones cannot vote.  I had once again asked the Board to NOT APPROVE Chief Jones’ appointment to this important Commission.  We all know, after all, that knowledge about the internal financial workings of the great concrete monolith is probably good insider information.

Ms. Driscoll, the County Auditor, Controller and Tax Collector, insisted that she had sent out a letter to all Special Districts to ask for nominees and that no one responded.  I asked what the definition of a Special District might be?  When did her letter go out?  How many Special Districts are there? She did not answer any of my questions.  The Board followed Supervisor Friend’s direction and approved Chief Jones even though I pointed out that the Local 3535 and Chief’s Association unanimously voted “NO CONFIDENCE” regarding Chief Jones and hopefully, he will resign soon.  

I looked into what constitutes a Special District within the County.  I was surprised that all of the County Service Areas (CSA) are considered a Special District.  That means any resident of Santa Cruz County could serve in the capacity that Chief Jones’ appointment covers, because several CSA’s cover countywide areas for septic tank inspections, freeway lighting, road repair, and fire protection.   I wonder to whom Ms. Driscoll addressed her letter for those Special Districts?  Hmmmm……..

PUBLIC HEARING FOR CSA 48 FOR FUNDING COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
The Board of Supervisors approved a June 6 Public Hearing for discussing the CSA 48 funding for next fiscal year.  I asked for a full accounting of Proposition 172 Public Safety Funding that the County gets every year from a 1/2 cent statewide sales tax.  Currently, the Board agrees with County Administrative Officer (CAO) Ms. Susan Mauriello that County Fire should get none of this $17 million pot.  Instead, 99.5% goes to law enforcement, with the County Fire Chiefs Association getting the 0.5% crumb.

This needs to change… and here is why.  County Fire Department’s well-trained volunteers cover the County’s emergency response to the unincorporated areas well.  What’s more, when CalFire engines and staff all leave the County to fight fires in other areas of California (and beyond), County Fire Department is the main emergency response agency.  

So, why won’t  the Board of Supervisors take responsible leadership action and divide the $17 million Proposition 172 money more equitably, as other county jurisdictions do?  Why has the County Board of Supervisors starved County Fire Department of funding such that now, the reserve balance in the Dept. Budget is ZERO???

Because Old Soquel/San Jose Road is closed due to storm damage, the CalFire Soquel station is unable to respond to any emergency in the Summit area.  This places the burden on County Fire Department’s Loma Prieta Station.  Don’t you think that needs our financial support?  I sure do.  Contact your Supervisor and demand that County Fire Department receive 50% of the Proposition 172 money.  Attend the public hearing on June 6 if you can, or write a letter.

• Greg Caput greg.caput@santacruzcounty.us
• Ryan Coonerty ryan.coonerty@santacruzcounty.us
• Zach Friend zach.friend@santacruzcounty.us
• John Leopold john.leopold@santacruzcounty.us
• Bruce McPherson bruce.mcpherson@santacruzcounty.us

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT’S DRAFT BUDGET IS REVEALING.

It was sort of an accident that I attended the Soquel Creek Water District Draft Budget meeting last week, but I’m glad I did because the information very interesting.  

I learned that, even though the District’s Board insists that they have made no decisions regarding whether the proposed PureWater Soquel Project to pump treated sewage water into the area’s drinking water supply, the 2017-18 budget adds in staff and supplies to support the Project.  This will increase the overall base operating expenses by 30.46% over last year.

I learned that the District borrowed the full amount of the Quail Run Tank Project construction funds in 2013, thinking that the Project would get done quickly, but the tank is still not constructed.   The Board lamented that community opposition to projects often sets them back.  Director Lather recommended the District consider making use of the State Revolving Fund Loans that would allow borrowing for major projects but extracting lump sums as the project progresses.  This would save a great amount of money in debt service, which is $2,488,800 in the proposed budget.  Good idea, huh?

I learned that the District expects the Water Demand Offset program to remain in place for another 5-10 years.  The District installed the program in 2003 as a short-term solution to the critical overdraft problem.  The problem is worse now, in spite of the offsets that developers are supposed to do to conserve water to off-set the demand that their new development will cause.   Sometimes, the developers just pay a lot of money to accomplish that (but you can’t drink money, can you?).

***I learned that Soquel Creek Water District’s 2017-18 Budget includes $600,000 from Barry Swenson Builder for the Aptos Village Project Water Capacity Fees (I wonder what that means?).

***I also learned that the District’s water rates are second-highest in the State for similar-sized agencies.  (Santa Cruz City is third.)  THE PROPOSED PUREWATER SOQUEL PROJECT WILL NECESSITATE A 10%-15% RATE INCREASE.

If you are a Soquel Creek Water District customer, you might want to attend the June 6 Board meeting to register your comments when the Board is set to adopt the Final 2017-18 Budget.  If I were you, I would be concerned.

Given all this, the Board agreed to seek applicants for a Federal Legislative Assistance and Support Staff Person.  The Board is considering adding this position to lobby for federal grant awards, and paying someone $4,000/month to do that.  Wow.

The Board also approved the Water Demand Offset Program option that would allow large developers to devise their own water-saving projects in order to push through their project proposals faster.  Currently, the new Water Demand Offset program only allows for a total of 4 Acre feet of new demand/year, with a maximum of .5Acrefeet allowed per applicant.  That means that if there is a large development, it may take a few years to satisfy the total offset requirement.  The Aptos Village Project, for example, will require 38.2 Acrefeet/year.

Well, the Board made that easier on big developers, like Barry Swenson Builder.  Now, they can just make up their own offset project, in addition to paying lots of money, and scoot on through the bothersome process that everybody else has to go through.  The Board even REDUCED the required deposit fee to review the proposal from $1,000 to $600.   

There will be no requirement for applicants to have their proposal prepared by or signed by a professional engineer or certified landscape architect unless District staff deems it necessary.  Wow.

This all worries me, especially when staff has publicly stated that verification of Water Demand Offset projects has been a problem in the past.  

Why not do the responsible thing and declare a moratorium on new connections until a secondary supply is in place?  The Water Demand Offset program is bogus, in my opinion.  The overdraft problem continues to mount, with seawater moving inland within the groundwater aquifer and threatening the stability of fresh potable water for the region.  The Board was close to declaring a moratorium in 2014, but a large new development at Twin Lakes Church shouted it down.  Too bad.  Instead, Soquel Creek Water District…and Santa Cruz County…continue to bend over backwards for developers, when there is not enough fresh water to supply the increased demand.

There is a real disconnect between this reality and the impending land use changes locally.  Write your Supervisor or Councilmember.  The salt water clock is ticking away…..

WATCH FOR THE HELICOPTER AND MAGNETIC LOOP FLYING NEAR THE BEACHES THIS WEEK.
In an effort to find out where the fresh water/salt water interface is within the aquifer areas beneath the Monterey Bay, the Mid County Groundwater Agency is paying $100,000 for a company from Denmark to do a study.  The helicopter that we may see soon flying at low altitude near the beaches will begin in Marina and move along the coastline to the Santa Cruz harbor.  The crews and equipment will stage at Seascape Park, Aptos.  

The idea works on electrical resistivity, and the study will hopefully generate a snapshot map of areas where salt water  intrusion inland is most imminent.  

I appreciate the volunteers from the Sierra Club that will be monitoring the study for effects on bird populations and sea life.

EENEY, MEENEY, MINEY, MOE….
The Mid County Groundwater Agency Board met last week to approve the application process for deciding who will be on the Plan Committee to design a sustainability plan for the Purissima Aquifer users that will reverse the overdraft problem and heal the aquifer by 2040.  I found the discussion and subcommittee proposal very confusing.  The application is vague, but the Board obviously has clear ideas amongst themselves as to qualities they will be looking for in those who apply.  Does that seem transparent to you?  I don’t think so.

The Board discussed the merits of approaching various organizations to submit a nominee from their group.  The criteria for selection was not discussed.  The process of selection and interview was not discussed.

Board Chairman Mr. Bruce Jaffe, who represents Soquel Creek Water District, had to be reminded several times to include public comment throughout the meeting.  When I asked to speak about the application for the Plan Committee, he agreed, after a motion had already been quickly made to adopt the application proposal. I asked that the Board create a job description for the Plan Committee applicants, and clearly state what the criteria for selection would be.  I urged this in the spirit of fairness and clarity to all applicants.

“Uh-huh,” said Chairman Jaffee when I finished, and without a breath, asked for a vote on the proposed application.  The approval was unanimous, and without any discussion of the issues that I raised.

Gee…the Board wonders how they can design outreach efforts to get more people to attend their meetings?   I suggest they respect the comments and opinions of those who attend.   As things run now, there is little respect and no consideration for the public’s opinions as the Board creates policy that will affect who gets how much water, and how high the taxes will be on that water. Look for your chance to be on the Plan Committee hopefully any day now:  www.MidCountyGroundwater.org

WHAT’S THE PLAN FOR RANCHO DEL MAR CENTER?
Stay tuned next week, when a current game of phone tag will probably produce some answers.  I really hope the redwood tree by Ace Hardware can be saved. Bruce Walton BWalton@trcretail.com  858-442-9960

SPEAKING OF SAVING A VENERABLE TREE…
Remember when there were THREE large Cypress trees lining Soquel Drive in Aptos, across from Rancho del Mar Center?  And remember when the Aptos Rancho Road, also across from Rancho del Mar Center, was lined by large Monterey Pine trees?  And remember when there was a meadow and apple orchard across from Rancho del Mar Center?  I do…but I have lived in Aptos for 32 years.  Now, all that remains of those majestic trees is ONE Cypress tree.  A couple of weeks ago, I saw a survey marker against it’s trunk…  Oh, oh.  Does anyone know about a Heritage Tree Ordinance in our County and cities?  Let me know if you do.   I’ll be researching the matter for next week.

Commissioner Carolyn Swift admitted that she knew all along about the significant pre-history site but seemed at the hearing to just begin caring.  When multiple citizens asked for Native American observers to be added as a mitigation to the Historic Preservation Plan for the Project, she refused.   Indeed, the Commissioners would  not take any action to protect the artifacts of this significant Ohlone site.  

What about the Chinese cultural and historic deposits that are also in the area?  That does not even enter into their discussion.  That amazes me, since the historic Lam-Mattison Apple Dryer and Vinegar Works was there, along with a small Chinese settlement.  Mr. Lam was the grandfather of Santa Cruz businessman and benefactor Mr. George Ow.  None of the interpretive panels within the Project will apparently  feature information about this aspect of Aptos Village history.

Something is really wrong here.

JOIN THE CITIZEN PROTEST AT TROUT GULCH ROAD AND SOQUEL DRIVE THIS WEEK…every morning 7:00am-9:30am.  A group of Aptos citizens will be appealing the Historic Resources Commission decisions.  Stay tuned.

“CAN WE JUST REMAIN SILENT ON THIS?”
Those were the words in an e-mail from County Assistant Planning Director Ms. Wanda Williams, to Mr. David Nefouse, County Counsel, regarding the issue I raised via pre-hearing written communication about the Aptos Village Project Historic Preservation Plan being EXPIRED as of January, 2014.  By accident, I was included in that e-mail recipient list.

When I again raised the issue during the public hearing, the Commissioners again looked blankly to Ms. Murphy.  Again, she nervously shuffled papers and said that the Historic Preservation Plan is good for two years and as long as there is activity on the permit applications, everything is okay.  When one Commissioner, at the behest of a member of the audience, asked if there had been activity,  Ms. Murphy said “I do not have that information.”  Wow.

Well, there was no activity on the Project until after Barry Swenson Builder bulldozed the world-famous Post Office Bike Jumps on February 17, 2015…a full year after the Historic Preservation Plan had expired.  The Plan approval is valid for two years and can only be extended by the County Historic Resources Commission during a public meeting.  I have checked all agendas for the Commission since the Plan was modified and approved in January 19, 2012,  and the issue was never on the public agenda.

Santa Cruz County Code 16.42.060, which outlines development procedures for designated historic resources, states “When an Historic Resource Preservation Plan is required by this section, NO FINAL APPOVAL SHALL BE GIVEN to a land division, development permit, building permit, demolition permit, land clearing permit or grading permit for a project affecting an historical structure, object, propery, site or district, UNLESS AN HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE HISTORIC RESOURCE HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION…” (Caps added for emphasis.)

So, that means that since the Historic Resources Preservation Plan expired on January 19, 2014,  NONE, I repeat, NONE of the approvals or permits that the County Planning Department has issued is valid.  What’s more, that means that the Phase I Final Map approved by the County Board of Supervisors on December 8, 2015 IS NOT VALID.

At last Friday’s CEQA public hearing, I explained all this to the Historic Resources Commissioners at least three times.  They sure were not going to hear it from Ms. Murphy.

When Commissioner Swift asked Planners Ms. Annie Murphy and Ms. Paia Levine why the Commission had not been notified earlier about this and could the Commission make any approvals today?”  Ms. Levine replied “Well, you can just go ahead and approve all this and we can talk about the rest later.”  Well, that certainly is transparent and accountable government working for you, isn’t it?…. Take a moment and think about this.  

I wonder why Mr. Bill Parkin, the attorney from Wittwer & Parkin who represented the citizen group We Are Aptos in a Petition for Writ of Mandate last year, (basically a demand that County government officials follow County laws and requirements of the Aptos Village Project developers), did not point out the above information to Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Paul Burdick?  I tried to do just that in an Ex Parte document, but Mr. Parkin tried to block my action, and Judge Burdick denied my request that he consider my information. Again, something is really wrong here.

Further, not only is the Aptos Village Project Historic Preservation Plan expired, but the Project Subdivision Master Appliction 101027 IS ALSO EXPIRED, as of September 25, 2016.  

Well, the County Historic Resources Commission refused to acknowledge that last Friday’s public hearing was a discretionary approval action and, under CEQA law 15162(c) and 15088.5, that action provided a legal opportunity for new information and/or issues regarding substantial changes in circumstances to trigger a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be done, with possible new mitigations required.  

Those would be New mitigations, such as Native American observers on site at all times of earth disturbance in the CA-SCR-222 archaeological site.  New mitigations, such as a new traffic study conducted to update the 2004 study because that study did not consider any traffic analysis of intersections south (Rio del Mar and Freedom Blvd.) of the development (it did consider State Park Drive and Aptos Rancho Road however). It did not consider the impacts on Trout Gulch Road relative to the County Department of Public Works phasing the local road improvements and dumping most of the Nisene Marks State Park traffic onto Trout Gulch via the new Aptos Village Way connector road.  There are no plans to widen Trout Gulch Road to safely handle this burden.  New mitigations, such as valid civil engineer inspections of the 1928 Aptos Creek Bridge to make sure it will be able to safely handle the increased truck traffic.

Oddly, during the CEQA public hearing last Friday, Planner Ms. Annie Murphy kept advising the Commissioners that they could only address issues restricted to the addition of a skylight, adding a modern commercial steel roll-up door and modern steel employee entrance door, and removing a ramp to expand usable deck seating space.  New Leaf Market pushed this all through because “it is too challenging to adapt a modern use into an historic building.”  Besides, the New Leaf Market architect said at the April 10 public hearing “nobody will notice because the doors will be hidden from public view by a 15′ high retaining wall.”

Through Public Records Act requests, I have copies of communication from 2011 between then-County Supervisor  Ellen Pirie and current Assistant Planning Department Director Ms. Wanda Williams.  Ms. Pirie stated that “The Swenson team has stated that an EIR requirement would break the deal.”  Gee, I wonder what she meant by that?  Hmmmm……..

Sadly, this all means that in order to force the County and the Aptos Village Project developers to follow the law, a group of citizens who truly care about the Aptos community (not just the future tax income to County coffers), will be forced to again take legal action.  But this time, it won’t be Bill Parkin representing us.

NISSAN CAR DEALERSHIP ISSUE REMOVED FROM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA LAST WEDNESDAY (5/10)
The proposal to change the Sustainable Santa Cruz County Plan to allow a car dealership at Soquel Drive and 41st Avenue instead of mixed-use housing was removed from the County Planning Commission’s agenda last week.  This may have been due in part to the high volume of public communication regarding the issue, but most likely it was due to the developer purchasing the adjacent corner parcel (King’s Paint & Paper) which would offer a different possible traffic circulation scenario…. Stay tuned on this issue…it will be back before you know about it.

COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER APPEAL OF APPROVAL FOR A LARGE COMMERCIAL EVENT CENTER ON RURAL PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD
Why would the County Zoning Administrator, Ms. Wanda Williams, think that it is acceptable to approve a large commercial event center for a rural Aptos /Corralitos Pleasant Valley Road area when that use is against current County Code? Why would the Project Planner, Ms. Sheila McDaniel, report the associated traffic volumes at roughly HALF of what the traffic study reported they would be during events?  One does wonder about what is going on at the County government when approvals like this come flying out in the face of County Code.  That is why I filed an appeal.  

The appeal hearing before the County Planning Commission is scheduled for June 14. Stay tuned.

WILL THE REDWOOD TREE BE SAVED?
Stay tuned for an update next week on the Rancho del Mar Center remodel.   Mr. Bruce Walton, TRC Retail representative, mentioned several people had contacted him about the remodel proposal….good work!

APTOS /LA SELVA FIRE CHIEF JON JONES MOVES FORWARD TO GET A TWO-YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION
I was unable to attend the May 11 Aptos / La Selva Fire District Board meeting, but was told by reputable sources that once again, the public showed up in masses to testify in support of the Firefighter Local 3535 and ask the Board to NOT extend Chief Jones’ contract.

Articles in the local newspapers quoted past co-workers of Chief Jones in his support.   Meanwhile, the fire chiefs within the District unanimously issued a VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE regarding Chief Jones.

Is the Board listening to the public and the firefighters?  

Meanwhile, on May 16, the County Board of Supervisors will vote to “Approve the appointment of Chief Jon Jones to continue as the alternate member representing Special Districts on the Treasury Oversight Commission for a term expiring March 31, 2021, as recommended by the Auditor-Controller-Tax Collector.”  (Consent Item #12)

The Board had removed Chief Jones’ name from that job last month when I pointed out the problems occurring within the District and that Local 3535 voted unanimously “NO CONFIDENCE” against Chief Jones.   The Board subsequently approved Supervisor Caput to take the job of alternate member on the Treasury Oversight Commission instead. I wonder what is going on in that great concrete monolith at 701 Ocean Street?

APPLICATION DEADLINE FOR THE NEW COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CLOSED LAST MONDAY…..
May 8 was the deadline for applicants interested in the job of CAO for Santa Cruz County government to toss their name in the hat for consideration.  I wonder how many people did that?

I wrote to Peckham and McKenney, the consultants that we are paying $20,000 to conduct the search, to find out.  The firm responded that I must contact Mr. Michael McDougal, Director of County Personnel.  

I wrote him, asking about the number of applicants.  He responded that I must make the request to County Counsel.  Well, I did that…stay tuned for the answer next week.  Do you think anybody wanted the job after they learned that the County Budget is $8.1 million in deficit?Well, the County Board of Supervisors is discussing the CAO appointment process in Closed Session during their May 16 meeting.

COUNTY BUDGET HEARINGS TO BEGIN JUNE 19
Also on the May 16 Consent Agenda is Item #15: “Accept the 2017-18 Proposed Budget and appendices as those that constitute the 2017-18 County Proposed Budget, order publication of the required notices, and set June 19, 2017 as the date for public hearings on the 2017-18 Proposed Budget to begin, as recommended by the County Administrative Officer.”

The hefty binder that holds the 2017-18 Proposed County Budget is already available to the public at the Clerk of the Board’s office (5th Floor).  It is a very expensive-looking document, with glossy, full-color graphics and thick cardstock paper.  Maybe some unanticipated revenue appeared to fund that?  Hmmmm…

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WANTS TO ACCEPT UNANTICIPATED $7.9 MILLION DOLLAR REVENUE.
Also on the May 16 County Board of Supervisor Consent Agenda is Item #48, “Accept unanticipated revenue of $7.9 million to pay emergency contracts for storm damage, approve emergency contract with Joseph J. Albanese for storm related damages on Valencia Road for $3.1 million, and take related actions, as recommended by the Director of Public Works.”  

Well, I am glad the repair finally got started last week to fix the failed culvert under Valencia Road that lead to closing Valencia Elementary School due to unsafe access.  According to Supervisor Zach Friend, there is no plan to get a temporary bridge in place before the end of the school year, even though he earlier told parents of students and residents of adjacent Rolling Green Estates that the temporary bridge would go in as soon as repairs started.

I think the project process has hardly followed an “Emergency” schedule.  Remember the Fish & Game official who stated that the County’s request for approval seemed to take a long time to get submitted to their agency, but was granted right away in early March?  But I suppose that continuing to call the process and “Emergency Repair” allows the County to waive the requirement for putting the project out to bid.   Hmmmm……     It’s too bad the work is being handed to a company from San Jose, and not providing jobs for local people.

Meanwhile, the County’s road construction project to benefit Aptos Village Project developers is moving along without having to deal with the pesky school traffic.   I am glad the Department of Public Works finally moved the traffic obstruction on Soquel Drive in front of Rancho del Mar Center…that was quite a hazard.   John Madonna Construction, the company doing the Aptos Village work, is from San Luis Obispo.  Once again, not employing local people.   Hmmm……

4.  The Staff Report failed to address these commercial development impacts on a public road and seemingly did not require or discuss any Transportation Improvement Assessment (TIA) fees that are required in other commercial development approvals.  The ordinance reads that a commercial developer must pay for all improvements necessary to mitigate the effects of the development.  The County has no money to improve Pleasant Valley Road to handle the traffic caused by this large event center…nor should we pay for such upgrades to serve a development.

5.  The Staff Report did not discuss the cumulative effects of approving the large commercial event center with respect to traffic and noise impacts on the Pleasant Valley rural community, in consideration of two other large wineries in the area (Nicholson Winery and Storrs Winery).  Ms. Williams approved outdoor amplified music to be allowed 4pm-9pm for the large events.  Ms. McDaniel stated that a noise study indicated that no sound would be heard beyond the Lester Winery property line.

If you have ever spent any time in a rural valley, you know that amplified outdoor music would echo throughout Pleasant Valley.  Ms. McDaniel stated that if enough neighbors file complaints with the County Sheriff, the permitted hours of amplified music could be reviewed.  That sets up tension in the neighborhood, doesn’t it?

6.  Ms. McDaniel reported that the development’s driveway will meet all standards for Aptos / La Selva Fire Protection District.  She made an error, however, in that Pleasant Valley is not within the boundaries of that fire agency….County Fire and CalFire respond there from Corralitos.  Has the developer met fire defensible space requirements with respect to areas classed as high fire risk?  What about an evacuation plan for 200 guests should there be a wildland fire in the area?  This critical public safety problem was not discussed in the Staff Report or at the public hearing.
7.  The Staff Report made an error in reporting the commercial development’s water supply.  Ms. McDaniel reported that Central Water District would supply the proposed large event center with water but did not report that the service connection is insufficient to provide the volume of water necessary for a large event center.

What Ms. McDaniel did not report is that the water will come from the private well on the site.  This area is part of the Mid County Groundwater Basin, which is in critical overdraft.  According to State law, all new commercial developments must provide proof that there exists sufficient water supplies to support the development’s sustainable long-term use.  There was no discussion of this problem.

The Planning Department also violated the Ralph M. Brown Act during the April 21 public hearing because not all of the materials viewed by Ms. Williams  and Ms. McDaniel were made available to the public.  The public was only provided with copies of the “Revised Conditions of Approval”  (Exhibit C) for the application, but not Exhibit A, a program statement and revision letter submitted by Swift Consulting Services to County Planning staff.  This document became the key to what Ms. Williams ultimately approved….she essentially gave the developer everything asked for in this document, which was not shared with the public at the hearing.  Mr. Swift’s requests were far and above what even Ms. McDaniels had recommended.

According to Government Codes 54957.5 and 54952(b): “Information given to a majority of the members of the legislative body in connection with an open meeting must be equally available to members of the public.”  Some public meetings have information like this available in a binder at the back of the room, but this was not the case at the Zoning Administrator’s public hearing on this matter.

There were two Pleasant Valley residents who found out about the public hearing and were able to attend the Friday, 9am hearing.  They felt their neighbors were not aware of the hearing.  The County only requires properties within a 300′ radius be notified.  In rural areas, that means very poor notification.

SO, EVEN WITH ALL THESE ERRORS, DID THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, MS. PREVISICH, GRANT A WAIVER OR REDUCTION OF THE $1800 APPEAL FEE?   No.

Is this obstruction of justice through unreasonable fees?  I think so.  Under economic duress, (and the financial assistance of some good friends who also care about preserving the rural quality of life and holding the County accountable), I am filing the appeal.  Ms. Williams told me that she would not even consider the points I raised in a six-page document until I paid the full $1800 appeal fee.   Wow.

By the way, the developer disclosed to Ms. McDaniel during a break in the public hearing that there are already one large and one small event scheduled at the winery event center and will occur before the Commercial Development Permit is in effect.  When Ms. Williams was made aware of this while granting approval, she paused, and said “Well, that’s okay, we’ll just call those ‘Family Parties’.”

Stay tuned.

IS A CAR SALES LOT THE SAME AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
Maybe the Planning Department is thinking people can sleep in their cars at the proposed area near 41st Avenue and Soquel Drive?  The area is designated as dense, three-story mixed-use on the Sustainable Santa Cruz County Plan, but the Planning Commission will consider the application for a car sales lot proposed there instead.

The public hearing is Wednesday, May 10, 9am, in the 5th Floor Supervisor Chambers (701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz).   Sometimes, these large issues get continued, so check with the Planning Commission website. (www.sccoplanning.com and look at the agendas link)  Contact Planner Nathan McBeth 454-3118.

WHAT DOES THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DO WITH PUBLIC COMMENT?
I have often wondered what the County Planning Department did with the comments recorded at the Aptos Village Plan community meetings years ago.  The current Aptos Village Project certainly does not reflect the nature of the comments at the many meetings I attended.

That concern was voiced by a Live Oak resident who attended the community meeting to discuss what could be done with the acreage at 7th Avenue and Brommer.  The County purchased the land for redevelopment, but now intends to sell it, with a caveat of how the land can be developed.  

Affordable housing would be nice, don’t you think?  Well, somehow the County thinks a hotel would be better.  About 80 people attended the community workshop at Live Oak Elementary School.  The facilitator showed slides of various possible scenarios….some of which the crowd quite vocally rejected.  What about affordable housing, some in the crowd kept asking…but there was no real answer.

Then, as these well-controlled events tend to go, we were divided into ‘work groups’ with a facilitator or two to write down our ideas and concerns.  The room was a buzz of discussion, making it difficult for some to hear.  

I was glad that Mr. John Ricker, the County’s water advisor from Environmental Health, was there to answer questions about the availability of water.  It would have helped discussions on the matter had Mr. Ricker been introduced so that people knew who he was and could find him to ask those critical questions.

At the end, a spokesperson from each group took a microphone and reviewed their group’s notes.  It was interesting to see that groups led by County Planning staff and, in the case of Ms. Diedre Hamilton, former Planning staffer and now a developer consultant, the group wanted a hotel (with bocci ball courts).  Those led by the youthful staff of the consultant tended to bring up uses that support the resident population…and bocci ball.

My group was the last to present.  I thought it was interesting that the consultant facilitator quickly removed the “Concerns” page from the easel and encouraged our representative to speed things up.  Had the concerns been read, they would have included that there is not enough affordable housing, that there might not be adequate environmental review (not EIR), that the public should get to vote on the ultimate plan, that there might be a negative impact on the harbor overflow parking, that traffic will become even worse, that there might not be enough water to support a hotel, that the local people will get ignored.

We were assured all comments will be carefully recorded and considered in formulating a use plan. But after the meeting was adjourned, a number of the participants talked with the consultant facilitator to voice their concern: “Will the energy, ideas and concerns expressed at the meeting really be used to develop the plan for what will be done with the land?”  

Many had the same thought as I did…from past experience, the answer will most likely be “NO”.  But the minutes will declare a vibrant public meeting was held…and the public wanted what the Planning Department said they wanted.  Check off the box.

I think I hear the shredders working overtime at 701 Ocean Street…….

YET ANOTHER WELL-CONTROLLED PUBLIC WORKSHOP.
I attended the May 6 County Parks Strategic Planning Workshop at Aptos Village Park, along with about 50 other residents.  The pattern was repeated…a facilitator told us we would break into groups, but not until we agreed on group etiquette.  I was taken back to grammar school days…

Share the mic, listen well, don’t judge, don’t get on your soapbox, behave, raise your hand and wait to be called on by your facilitator to ask for clarification.  Did we all agree?  I raised my hand.  “I’ll call on you in just a minute.”  Any other points of agreement?  One man suggested everyone turn off their cell phones.  

I raised my hand again.   “I’ll call on you in just a minute,” the facilitator said, then dispersed the group.  What I wanted to ask was that we NOT disperse, because a large group is, in my experience, more dynamic and focused.  

A young man from the County Parks Department came up to ask what I needed.  I presented my thoughts about dividing the group.  He just walked away without discussing anything.  I felt like bleating, but did not, and instead joined my appointed sub-group.  

Each of the four stations was allowed 17 minutes.  The first station was confusing.  We were told to vote on what mattered most to us by placing a colored dot next to the concept.  The concepts were vague.  “Exactly what does preserve and enhance natural resources involve?”  I asked.  The facilitator told me to just vote and we would discuss what things meant after that.  

“But how can I vote if I don’t understand what these things mean?”  I asked.  “Just vote,”  she replied.

I never did get an explanation of anything.  I guess I didn’t raise my hand high enough.  Maybe it was just too noisy to hear anything.  The facilitator rang the bell, and we all had to relocate to a different station.  I felt like I was part of a small herd of livestock.

When the main herd re-convened, the facilitator did a selective re-cap of four or five ‘unique’ ideas she had noted during the sessions, then we were excused.  When I asked when the comments would be made publicly available, one of the facilitators from the County Administrator Office said there was still one more public meeting at another area of the County, but the comments of all four meetings would be ready in two or three weeks.  Wow…not much time to assimilate all those colored dots and post-it notes into a County Park Strategic Plan that will reflect the thoughts and concerns of the public.

Yup, now I’m sure the shredders are working overtime at County government…..

NOT A SHRED OF NATIVE AMERICAN OR ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBSERVATION AT APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT.
The massive amounts of trenching and excavation work happening at the Aptos Village Project has been notable.  What has been missing is a qualified archaeological and Native American observer while all that digging is happening.  

Last year, Soquel Creek Water District did the right thing and paid such observers to stand guard monitoring the digging.  I recently read their report and noted significant historic and pre-historic items were found.  The report stated that the observers were required due to the existence of a significant archaeological site on the southern premises.  

The documentation for the Aptos Village Project makes no mention of this site.  The County’s Negative Declaration does not mention it, nor does it require any Native American observers.  Once again, the County relegates the critical task of determining if there are significant archaeologic deposits found during digging to the excavator operator.  That gives me no confidence that important artifacts will be noted or preserved.

Last Friday, I happened to be watching one of the many excavation crews through the chainlink fence when I saw the digger unearth a round stone object.  When I yelled at the operator to stop, he did, got out, picked up the object, and threw it back down.  

“I’m not an archaeologist, but I think that could be something significant,”  I said.  “Where is your archaeologist?”  The operator said he would go look.  The other workman let me know “they found LOTS of stuff over on the other side yesterday.  LOTS of stuff.”  

The operator did not return.  I went to the other side of the development….more digging….no observers.  I returned to the original spot….digging had continued.  The artifact was tossed up on the side….it looked like a stone mortar.

I left and made a call to a Native American observer.  She said she was supposed to be notified when excavation work began, but did not get a call.  She was concerned about no one being there to watch.

INDEED, WHO IS WATCHING BARRY SWENSON BUILDER AND THE APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION?
One wonders if the County cares at all about anything other than what the CAO envisions as future income?  

ATTEND THE APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT APPLE BARN PUBLIC HEARING
This Friday, May 12, 9:30am in the 5th Floor Supervisor Chambers….

Write your thoughts about the environmental problems at this development and demand further environmental review.  Under CEQA process, new information may be presented with a request for further environmental review….please contact me for this information.  

WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE ONE CALL.  MAKE A MONETARY DONATION.
MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE…..BUT DO SOMETHING THIS WEEK.

Cheers,

Well, now that we know the delay for beginning the Valencia Road repair was not due to staff at State Fish & Game (as was stated at a couple of  neighborhood meetings by Supervisor Friend and other County staff), the blame now goes to delaying so that a two-lane  temporary bridge can be installed, rather than a one-lane  temporary bridge.  That extra work will, according to Supervisor Friend, cause the temporary bridge installation to be delayed until early to mid JULY. Coincidentally, that is the same time the County’s $2 million-dollar Phase I road work and Trout Gulch traffic light project will finish up.  Handy, don’t you think?  One cannot deny that having the Valencia Elementary School traffic out of the way makes the road work benefiting Aptos Village Project much easier,  especially when the railroad crossing has to be closed down  for excavation and track replacement.

The Pajaro Valley Unified School District leadership  and Valencia Elementary School families (600+ students) need to press the County Public  Works Department to move on the temporary bridge faster, to allow the students and staff back before the end of the year.  The front page article in last Wednesday’s Santa Cruz Sentinel (4/26) interviewed Valencia Elementary teachers who must arrive daily at their temporary classrooms in Mar Vista  Elementary by 6:30am to set up, and by 2pm, take everything  down because the space is shared with other uses.  The article also stated that routine facility maintenance at Valencia Elementary stopped when the school closed on  January 23. 

A temporary one-lane bridge was installed in three weeks for residents on Nelson Road in Scotts Valley…why is the County dragging its feet on the Valencia temporary bridge? 

Assistant Public Works Director, Mr.  Steve Wiesner assured me that staff is working as quickly as they are able to on this project, but that there are other  projects to work on in the County.  There are 22 civil  engineers on County payroll (according to Transparent  California website), and the Board of Supervisors recently  approved contracting with outside engineers for the next 3-5  years, at a cost of $15-$25 million to the taxpayers.  Mr. Wiesner did not appreciate my reminding him that the Valencia problem is the only road problem that has caused a public school to be closed.  He did not like my explaining that people I know who have installed similar emergency bridges in the military are, like many people in the Aptos community (as well as Fish & Game) wondering why no work is taking place.  He invited anyone with plans to visit him…maybe you know someone, too.

Steve Wiesner Steve.Wiesner@santacruzcounty.us, 831-454-2160 Dept. Of Public Works
Tim Bailey Timothy.Bailey@santacruzcounty.us, 831-454-2160

In the meantime, Supervisor Friend sent a message to Valencia Elementary School families and Rolling Green Estates residents that PG&E and Trout Gulch Water Mutual Company will begin moving utilities this week or  next….three full months after the closure.   Hmmm….

COUNTY ROAD WORK BLOG RARELY UPDATED FOR CITIZEN INFORMATION
Before the County’s roadwork in Aptos Village to benefit the developers began, Supervisor Zach Friend assured the community that their source of current information regarding traffic delays and road construction timelines would all be available on a project website. 

Well, here is the website.

Because I must travel through the construction zone daily, I check the website frequently for updates.  There are none.  The site is merely a documentation of what work has occured in the past, and is rarely updated.  I suppose it really doesn’t matter  because very few people even know the website information  exists.  The two orange construction project information signs that are required to be positioned at each  end of the road construction zone are both located facing  sparsely-traveled Aptos Street, and are difficult to read through the orange plastic netting.   

I have asked more than once that Public  Works staff re-position the signs.  No response. 

Maybe you will have better results:  Traffic Engineer  Jack Sohriakoff Jack.Sohriakoff@santacruzcounty.us

And…

County Supervisor Zach Friend Zach.Friend@santacruzcounty.us (he says he loves to hear from us)

SPEAK OUT AND WRITE FOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT AT MAY 12 PUBLIC HEARING. Friday, May 12, 9:30am  5th Floor Board of Supervisors Chambers, 701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz.

Due to several Brown Act violations, the County Planning Department has scheduled a re-do of the  public hearing for the Aptos Village Project Apple Barn  proposed changes to the Historic Resources Preservation Plan.  This is a discretionary approval by the County Historic Resources Commission, and therefore is a legal time for members of the public to bring forth new information  that warrants the County to require the developers to  conduct further environmental review.  

The case can be made for this demand on several issues.  Contact me for this information:

Becky Steinbruner ki6tkb@yahoo.com or 831-685-2915.

The letters must be submitted before the close of the public hearing on May 12.  Address them to the County Board of Supervisors and the Santa Cruz County Planning Dept., and the County Historic Resources Commission.

C/o Ms. Annie Murphy Annie.Murphy@santacruzcounty.us,
Ms. Wanda Williams Wanda.Williams@santacruzcounty.us, 
Chairman John Leopold John.Leopold@santacruzcounty.us

MIDCOUNTY GROUNDWATER AGENCY BOARD WILL MAKE BIG DECISION: WHO WILL CREATE THE WATER PLAN & POLICY?
The MidCounty Groundwater Agency, a joint power required by the State to develop and implement  a sustainable groundwater management plan for the overdrafted aquifers in the area  will meet Thursday, May 18, 7pm at the Simpkins Swim Center.  There will be representatives of Soquel Creek Water District, Central Water District, Santa Cruz County, small water companies and private well owners available at 6pm to discuss related issues and answer your questions.

One of the items on the agenda (I have been told) will be deciding who will be able to participate on the Advisory Committee that will help MidCounty Groundwater Agency Water Planner, Ms. Darcy Pruitt, develop THE PLAN and how it will be implemented. I have been told that members of the general public can and should ask to be on that committee.  The Board will be discussing how to choose just who will be included on that Committee. Private well owners and customers/owners of small water companies in particular need to be involved.  The Board has repeatedly stated that there is no need to make an effort to notify these water users “until we have something to tell them.”  I think it is better, for transparency, to have those parties at the table BEFORE decisions are made, rather than AFTER the decisions have been made.This is critical.  I hope that you will attend the Board meeting Thursday, May 18, 7pm at Simpkins Center.

www.midcountygroundwater.org

SUPPORT THE APTOS/LA SELVA FIREFIGHTERS AT MAY 11 BOARD MEETING
Since last month’s action by Aptos / La Selva Firefighters Local 3535 to vote UNANIMOUS NO CONFIDENCE  against Chief Jon Jones, and a massive show of community support at the April 13 Board meeting, there has been no action from the Board.  Many citizens requested Chief Jones submit his resignation, and that the  Board demand it.

The firefighters have sounded the alarm bell for the public to take action to protect the level of community service that the District is known and trusted to provide.  Chief Jones has taken actions to cut funding and staffing such that critical services such as child car seat programs to educate new parents and fire protection inspections are gone.  The surf rescue program, which saves lives, is under duress due to slashed funding for training.  The busiest fire engine is routinely taken out of service to staff a small medical response unit as part of an agreement with the ambulance company (American Medical Response or AMR) that Chief Jones neglected to re-negotiate and now cannot for another 18 months.  Dedicated seasoned high-level staff resigned early due to poor conditions and disrespect from Chief Jones.

The firefighters need your support.  Attend the May 11 meeting, 7pm at the Aptos/La Selva firestation near Cabrillo College.

‘DO NOT RESIST’ FILM  SCREENING LAST SUNDAY (4/30)  AND DISCUSSION WITH  MR. NORM STAMPER WAS A REAL EYE-OPENER.
Last weekend, the local American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Veterans for Peace, and the Resource Center for Non-violence teamed up to host Mr. Norm Stamper, former Seattle Chief of Police, and present the movie “Do Not Resist” documentary about this country’s police militarization.  There was also a panel discussion that included Chief Stamper, Santa Cruz Councilmember Ms. Sandy Brown, journalist/broadcaster John Malkin, and attorney Ms. Samora Marion from the San Francisco Department of Police Accountability.

Chief Stamper resigned from his post in 2000 after his department pepper-sprayed a crowd of 50,000-60,000 non-violent protesters at the World Trade Organization Conference in Seattle. He apologized to the audience Sunday after the documentary “Do Not Resist” ended.   

He explained that at the time he authorized the pepper spray, the importance of clearing the crowded intersection was paramount.  “We did what we thought we had to do,” he said.   It was not until later that he realized the action quickly turned a peaceful protest into a perilous riot. 

The documentary focused on SWAT teams and the “pumped-up” tactics used during raids that often occur in the middle of the night.  It discussed the danger of local law enforcement juridictions accepting the free “surplus” military equipment (BearCats, etc) just because it is offered by Homeland Security.  It showed excerpts of Congressional inquiries bearing the fact that 36% of the “surplus” equipment is actually brand new. It discussed the lack of oversight by the federal government regarding how the equipment is used, even though there is a stipulation that the equipment CANNOT be used to control unruly crowds.

Other information in the documentary  showed a disturbing use of blanket area facial recognition software that allows local law enforcement to identify any and all people in public and to track their movements.  The company Persistent Surveillance Systems CEO stated that there would be mistakes but it didn’t really matter.  Use of racial information to bolster Predatory Policing (PredPol) models is arguably unnecessary, said the CEO, but practiced any way.   A Los Angeles police officer demonstrated the license plate reading and tracking technology already in use in patrol cars.  It disturbed me to see law enforcement’s use of artificially-intelligent observation drones in public places  being tested, with independent AI “decision-making” regarding use of lethal force if a “person of interest” is detected.  These drones can fly over large areas in formation, and can communicate with one another for decision-making.  “When people are in public places, they no longer have privacy rights” stated the officer explaining the technology.

Well, that was enough to tie my stomach in knots, but the movie’s end with a clip of Dave Grossman, the nation’s number one trainer for law enforcement, pumping up the conference crowd by referring to citizens speaking out against police use of lethal force as “slimey little things that must be squashed and crushed back into their holes and kept out of sight”  threw me and half the theater audience over the edge.  In the film, Mr. Grossman’s students stood and applauded.

Mr. Stamper’s ensuing discussion was rich.  He advocates for citizens to demand change of the broken system that seems to have forgotten the motto “Protect and Serve”.  He points out that it is unconstitutional for American military troops to use force against citizens on American soil, so the Department of Homeland Security offers free military equipment to local law enforcement jurisdictions and calls upon their SWAT  to conduct initial drug raids and crowd control.  The federal agents then move in for further action.  Over 40% of America’s SWAT are freshly from active military duty.

“80% of the SWAT raids in this country are against nonviolent drug offenders,”  he said.  The film showed a SWAT team nearly raiding the wrong address, and then being angry because they could not find the weed listed in the warrant.

Mr. Stamper stated that there are …

THREE THINGS CITIZENS MUST DO TO CHANGE THE BROKEN SYSTEM:

1. Demand an end to the “Drug War“.  When President Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” in 1971, it was really declaring a War on citizens.  The U.S. government has spent $1.5 trillion in prosecution of mostly low-level drug offenses (chiefly cannabis).  Mr. Stamper insists that this money would be better spent on treatments for addiction and mental illnesses.
2. Set and enforce NATIONAL STANDARDS for law enforcement procedural standards regarding use of force, requiring self discipline to refrain from weapons use at all.  The National Standards will be used in conjunction with local jurisdictional additional restrictions crafted by grassroots efforts.
3. Put the Community back in a people’s police force, create a definition of community policing with the use of census tracks, election models, and include a citizen panel for making hiring policies, crisis management policies and civil demonstration policies.  Create a partnership between the public and law enforcement that gives meaning to transparency and rebuilds trust.

Mr. Stamper encouraged the audience to become familiar with local law enforcement personnel by volunteering for ride-alongs.  He said that law enforcement leaders need to begin each shift with the words “Nobody is going to die today” and actively work to change the police mentality that “I never back away from a fight” and “I always win”.  David Grossman, the country’s #1 law enforcement trainer said however, “You are men and women of violence, and you will win  by using superior violence.”   

Before he returns to the peaceful San Juan Islands, Mr. Stamper will meet with Chiefs of Police and the County Sheriff to advocate for re-instatement of citizen police review commissions in the local law enforcement jurisdictions.    What will you do?

“Sheriff Jim Hart” Jim.Hart@santacruzcounty.us
Kevin Vogel – Santa Cruz Chief of Police  Contact: (831) 420-5810
Steve Walpole, Jr. – Scotts Valley Chief of Police Contact: (831) 440-5670
Terry McManus – Capitola Chief of Police  Contact: (831) 475-4242 policechief@ci.capitola.ca.us
David Honda – Watsonville Chief of  Police  Contact:  (831) 471-1151

Here are the violations committed that must be cured and corrected with a re-hearing:

1. Improper notification: the agenda for the public hearing was not made available at least 72 hours in advance of the hearing.

2. The agenda, once made available to the public, did not include any of the information in the attachments referenced in the agenda.  The public was therefore given no information regarding the specifics of the proposed amendment changes.  Members of the public unable to attend the 9:30am Monday public hearing could not have responded in writing to issues reviewed by the Commission due to improper notification procedures.

3. The agenda, when first made available to the public, had the incorrect time for the public hearing, listing it as occurring at 9:30pm.  This was corrected when an observant member of the public questioned Planning staff member, Ms. Murphy, 24 hours before the public hearing.  Members of the public who viewed the agenda before it was corrected were improperly notified and improperly informed.

4. The agenda was very vague and was not written in such a way as to pique the public’s interest to further investigate critical issues not available in the agenda.  For example, the agenda stated the proposed amendment reduced the number of doors.  In reality, the two doors remaining are proposed to be a modern industrial steel roll-up door and a steel door for employee entrance.  This diverges greatly from the historic preservation of the character of the structure, which is eligible for the National Historic Registry.

5. Members of the public attending the public hearing were given incomplete packets of information, devoid of many Exhibits purported to be in the agenda packets of Commissioners.

6. There was an insufficient number of complete information packets available for all members of the audience at the public hearing.  Because no advance information was available, even the members of the public who attended the public hearing were not properly or fully informed of all of the critical issues being considered.

7. There was insufficient room for all attendees to be comfortably seated.  Even though Ms. Murphy was notified in advance that a sizeable number of people were planning to attend and that she needed to consider a larger room for the public hearing, attendees were crowded into the small Planning Department Conference Room.  The chairs were uncomfortably close together, making access difficult, and some members of the public were forced to stand the entire duration of the hearing.

8. The County Historic Resources Commission website was not updated with any current information before the public hearing.

9. During the public hearing, it became clear that three of the five Commissioners had privately toured the Hihn Apple Barn and the Aptos Village Project with Barry Swenson Builder foreman Mr. Keith Henderson at some point before the public hearing.  This constitutes a serial meeting and as such violated the Ralph M. Brown Act.

REQUEST NOW THAT COUNTY PLANNER MS. ANNIE MURPHY NOTIFY YOU OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL ASSOCIATED INFORMATION TO BE CONSIDERED:

Annie Murphy Annie.Murphy@santacruzcounty.us  or phone 831-454-3111.

Mark your calendar for Friday, May 12 at 9:30am for the second public hearing to consider these vendor-driven changes to the Historic Preservation Plan for the Hihn Apple Barn.  Remember, the New Leaf Market architect said at the last hearing that adding modern changes to this 125-year old historic treasure of the Project “won’t really matter because no one will be able to see them due to the 15-foot high retaining wall nearby.” 

Is that the attitude our community wants to support when we were promised the historic character of the Barn would be preserved?

THIS HEARING IS ALSO THE LEGAL TIME TO PRESENT NEW INFORMATION REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT THAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AT THE TIME OF INITIAL APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT’S MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION.   
I wonder why work on the foundation for the three-story building next to the Apple Barn has stalled after it was pointed out to Assistant Planning Director Ms. Wanda Williams and Chief Building Official Mr. Martin Heaney that there was no permit issued for the work?  Hmmmm…..

Maybe someone took a closer look at the second soil report that stated liquefaction risk was low, when the first report stated liquefaction risk was high?  Hmmm…….

COUNTY ROAD WORK BENEFITING THE APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT SLOWED THIS WEEK
For unknown reasons, the bulk of the construction equipment brought in by John Madonna Construction of San Luis Obispo has been idle on the railroad tracks at Trout Gulch Road and Soquel Drive this past week.  Maybe it was the rain?  Maybe it was the lack of archaeological observers on site during previous excavation work (and a significant historic artifact was discovered)? 

Maybe it was the potentially-contaminated soils under the 200′ of railroad track bed to be excavated 31″ deep that must be sampled, tested and remediated?  That will be especially important now that the disturbed soils from Pete Testorff’s and Joe Appenrodt’s parcels (known to have high lead and arsenic levels, and possibly petroleum compounds) have discharged stormwater runoff that collected at the railroad tracks.  An independent analysis of the sediment-laden stormwater is forthcoming.

There are many potential soil contamination problems at the Aptos Village Project.  But what else would one expect, given the extensive historic railroad and lumber yard use, along with the apple dryers, which often contribute to elevated arsenic levels in soils?

THE GOOD NEWS IS THE VALENCIA ROAD REPAIR WILL BEGIN IN TWO WEEKS
It was interesting to discover last week that officials from State Fish and Wildlife have also been puzzled why no work has occurred on the Valencia Road repair.  “We assumed that the Valencia Road site would receive a temporary bridge to resume service, as was done on Nelson Road in Scotts Valley.” the official wrote.  That official thanked the members of the public who sent information that Valencia Elementary School has been closed due to unsafe access and await the Valencia Road repair.  That person contacted the County Department of Public Works, and reported back that the County representative, Mr. Tim Bailey, stated the work will begin in two weeks.

Contact Mr. Tim Bailey or phone 831-454-2160 and ask when the work will begin. 

The 600+ students at Valencia Elementary School will thank you and so will the 130 households in adjacent Rolling Green Estates. I wonder why the work was stalled?  Do you think it was to make the road construction project at Trout Gulch Road and Soquel Drive easier without the school traffic?  I do.

WHY IS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY PARKS SPENDING $35,000 TO PAVE APTOS VILLAGE PARK ROAD?
I wondered that when I read over last weeks’ County Board of Supervisor Consent Agenda.  The binder of information available for the public in the County Clerk of the Board’s window did not have the plans included in the documentation.  There was no notation that the plans were available at any other source or that they were missing from the binder. 

The documentation stated that all information would be available in the County General Services Dept. at 701 Ocean Street (that’s room 330).  I went there Tuesday morning and asked to see the information.  I was told it was not available to the public until after it was approved by the Board.  Transparent government? For that reason, I asked the Board to remove the item from the Consent Agenda and place it on the regular agenda.  That means I had to wait until the very end of the meeting. 

I was informed by the Board that there are public computers available at  Clerk of the Board’s office.  I did not know that because there are no notices posted at the two computers in the lobby, which were placed there last fall for the Cannabis licensing program.

Well, I had a commitment to honor that required me to leave the County Building for over an hour.  I returned to find the Board meeting seemingly near the end of the item preceding the Aptos Village Park Road work issue.  I dashed to the public computer to look at the plans.  One computer was only for Cannabis licensing and the other was not operational.

The kind lady at the office got the second computer to work, but the plans were very large and took a long time to become available.  I dashed back to the Board meeting…it seemed like the hearing about spending $1million for serial inebriates was closing…I dashed back to the computer to see a plan for the parking lot work that County Parks staff had drawn for the bid work but there were no less than THREE large volumes describing the actual scope of the work going out to bid.  Frantic,  I dashed back to the Board  meeting.  Again, it seemed close to the end, so I sat to listen. 

My item for discussion came up.  I explained that I had great difficulty accessing the information but saw that the Aptos Village Park parking lot was to be repaved and work done at the entrance adjacent to Aptos Creek Road. 

Why do this work now when the County’s Phase II of the road construction work on Aptos Creek Road is forthcoming, and would most likely damage the Park’s road entrance?  Why do this work at all when the Park road is in better shape than most of the County roads?  Why not slurry seal the parking lot, rather than use expensive paving?  LEO’s Haven, the All-Inclusive Park for kids with mobility challenges could really use that $35,000 instead.

Chairman John Leopold did not ask any County staff to address my questions. “I am surprised, Ms. Steinbruner, that you would ask that Parks spend money for engineered plans for this project.”  I did not say I wanted that, but rather that I had become interested because the paving project drawings had not been drawn by engineers.  I live on a privately-maintained road and as such, know that the County will not accept from my neighborhood any drawings for paving projects unless they are from a licensed engineer. 

“Your opinion about the Aptos Village Project is widely known, Ms. Steinbruner.”  and Leopold looked to Second District Supervisor Zach Friend.  “The answers to your questions are all available in the material, if you would have only taken the time to read it.”  he said.  At that, the Board voted unanimously to approve spending $35,000 on the road into Aptos Village Park that is in excellent condition. Well, well, well.  I just have to wonder if there is more to this project than meets the public eye?  Stay tuned…..

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST DOW AND SHELL CHEMICAL CORPORATIONS FOR GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION PROBLEMS
Kudos to Ms. Melissa Dennis for her excellent Op-Ed piece in the Santa Cruz Sentinel (Sunday, April 23, page C9).  Ms. Dennis clearly described the problem with the 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) contamination in one of the production wells currently serving water to Soquel Creek Water District’s customers in the Seascape/Aptos areas.

TCP is a carcinogen that was an unnecessary byproduct of an old formula for the fumigant Telone.  Dow removed TCP from the fumigant 30 years ago, after knowingly contaminating water supplies of millions of Californians but not publicly disclosing the hazard.

According to Ms. Dennis’ article, “The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) says five parts TCP per trillion is too much. The levels in the Balustrol Drive well have been as high as 15 parts per trillion, despite the fact that TCP hasn’t been applied in over 30 years.”

At last Tuesday’s Soquel Creek Water District Board meeting, Item 5.4 discussed System Water Production Reports.  The issue of TCP at the Country Club Well is outlined on page 263:  “Country Club Well was drilled in 1953.  Chromium 6 is present at an average of 6.8micrograms/liter (the MCL, or Maximum Contaminant Level, is 10 micrograms/liter).  Country Club water also contains 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) at concentrations EXCEEDING (bold type added for emphasis) the draft MCL of 5 nanograms per liter (ng.L).  TCP levels at Country Club range from less than 5 ng/L to 15ng/L.  The MCL is expected to be finalized later this year.”  

“In addition to commissioning a feasibility study for treatment options and costs, District staff is also investigating the feasibility of temporarily reducing or stopping the use of the Country {Club} Well pending installation of treatment in order to minimize exposure to TCP.”

****When I asked the Board if they would take the well off-line NOW, the answer was NO, because the State has not yet officially set the maximum contaminant level that would require that action.****

So, those who drink Soquel Creek Water District’s water in the Seascape/Aptos area are getting a daily dose of TCP carcinogen, as it is blended with the water from other wells.  Does that bother you?  I am not one of those customers, but it bothers me that the Board does not see value in immediately removing a known carcinogen from the water they sell.  

Soquel Creek Water District has been required to report the TCP levels to the County Board of Supervisors, but no one has taken any action to ask that the contaminated well be taken off-line as a public health precaution.  Supervisor Zach Friend recently told a citizen that he buys bottled water for his toddler to drink, due to concerns about possible contaminants in Soquel Creek Water District supplies.  Hmmm…

CALL the District 475-8500 or WRITE the Board and ask why the Country Club Well continues to remain in production when TCP levels are a potential health hazard (enough that the District is suing Dow and Shell Corporations for the problem)?

Tom LaHue toml@soquelcreekwater.org (current President)
Bruce Daniels bruced@soquelcreekwater.org  (Vice-President)
Carla Christensen carlac@soquelcreekwater.org
Bruce Jaffe brucej@soquelcreekwater.org
Rachel Lather rachell@soquelcreekwater.org
Ron Duncan rond@soquelcreekwater.org (General Manager)

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT APPROVED A SPECIAL RATE FOR TWIN LAKES BAPTIST CHURCH FUTURE ADDITIONS
The Twin Lakes Baptist Church wants to add a 330-person-capacity wedding chapel, a new coffee house, and a new outreach center to their campus.  The organization requested a MUCH-REDUCED water demand offset figure than the District would normally consider.  However, because of the good record keeping the Church could provide regarding current water use, the Board agreed to approve the reduction.  It seems the water demand offset rules can always be bent to suit certain interests.  I wonder if this Board action will set a precedent for other applicants to now make claims for reductions?   

Remember, this is the same group that in 2014 filled the Board meeting beyond capacity at Seascape Resort to protest when some Board members were recommending a moratorium due to the critical groundwater overdraft and sea water intrusion problem.  Back then, the Church wanted to expand their school campus and needed the water service approval to get building permits.

The Board instead voted to declare a Groundwater Emergency, and granted the service agreement.  They also went on to grant the approval for the Aptos Village Project, which will use 38+ AcreFeet of water every year…..that’s a lot.

Keep in mind the District now only allows a total of about 4AcreFeet/year new water use, because the seawater intrusion problem continues to cause irreversible damage to the region’s water supply.

MEANWHILE, THE NEW O’NEILL RANCH WELL IS STILL OFFLINE due to unexplained increasingly high levels of ammonia in the water.  The new Granite Way Well, constructed next to the Aptos Village Project, is a relatively low-producer due to the deep non-water-bearing clay layers.  Engineer Mr. Taj Dufour stated that the well is still due to come online this summer,…even though no work seems to be happening to develop the well. 
I wonder if there were any of those Barry Swenson Builder illegal diesel tank contaminants found in the water tests?  Hmmm……

WONDERING WHAT SANTA CRUZ CITY WATER THINKS ABOUT COOPERATIVE TREATED SEWAGE WATER PROJECTS?
Ms. Rosemary Menard will speak about this at the next Soquel Creek Water District meeting on May 2, at the Capitola City Council Chambers, 6pm.

WONDERING ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE DEEP WATER DESAL PLANT IN MOSS LANDING?
Representatives of that group will give a presentation at the May 16 Soquel Creek Water District meeting, same place, same time.  Former District General Manager Ms. Kim Adamson now shepherds the massive Project.

WANT TO TOUR SANTA CRUZ CITY’S NEW BELTZ WELL & TREATMENT PLANT?
Sign up for the May 1 tour (11am) by calling 420-5213.

LACK OF TRANSPARENT ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DECISION TO APPROVE A COMMERCIAL EVENT CENTER ON RURAL PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD.
A Pleasant Valley resident who found out at the last minute about a public hearing to consider approval for a large event center in his neighborhood told me many other neighbors with concerns just did not know about the hearing last Friday.  Maybe that’s because the County is only required to notify residents up to 300′ from the project…maybe the cows in the pasture next door got the notice?  

The Zoning Administrator, Ms. Wanda Williams, had not visited the site to see how narrow Pleasant Valley Road is before she approved more events to be held than what Planner Ms. Sheila McDaniels recommended, due to neighborhood comments.  The applicant’s traffic study (Hamilton & Swift is the lead on this) indicated there would be no impact on the traffic caused by 10 large events (200 guests) and 16 small events (50 guests) every year, in addition to the regular weekend wine tasting events.

What amazed me was that Ms. Williams was prepared to approve the zoning change to Commercial use in this rural residential and agricultural community, but was not exactly sure how she wanted the conditions of approval declared.  “We’ll just have to tweak it and put up on the website what we decide to approve,”  she said. 

I pointed out that doing so is not transparent government.  She declared a five-minute break, returned, and approved more events than what had been recommended, with the option to request even more large events (200 guests) with amplified music lasting until 9pm within six months, at a level of discretionary approval NOT requiring any public notice at all.  Wow.

I guess it did not matter to Ms. Williams that she approved something that is being considered under the Planning Department’s Environmental Review policy, but has not been vetted by the public or the Board of Supervisors.  Maybe the Pleasant Valley community who value their quiet rural quality of life will have to pay $1800 to appeal the decision…and hire a lawyer.  Here we go again…..

The Board of Supervisors has not approved that portion of the Project yet, so I wonder how work could begin?  There is item #23 on the April 18 Board of Supervisor consent agenda (reserved for non-controversial items???) to approve the Aptos Village Park Road Repairs and begin bidding.  Gee, I wonder if that is the same as Aptos Village Phase II Traffic Improvement Project?  Semantics can be your friend, can’t it?

The County’s informational blog available on the Department of Public Works website has not been updated since March 28.  The two orange notification signs for the Project both face little-traveled Aptos Street.  Why aren’t the signs on Soquel Drive and Trout Gulch, where people can see the 24-hour Project Disturbance Coordinator’s phone number and the informational website information?  The flashing sign blocking the right lane of traffic at Rancho del Mar Center only has the stagnant “Expect Delays” and the same date….will this continue until July 17 as the only source of public information? In the meantime, Supervisor Zach Friend has sent information to Valencia Elementary School families stating that the Valencia Road repair is being held up by Fish & Wildlife requiring a larger culvert than was in previous existence.  If that is true, that removes the emergency contingent of the repair because the project has now become an improvement. 

Residents of nearby Rolling Green Estates wonder why there cannot be a temporary one-lane bridge installed now, similar to what the County installed within three weeks for the residents of Nelson Road in Scotts Valley?  Supervisor Zach Friend’s information states “FHWA” is requiring some approvals.  He never explains what that acronym means, but for your information, it is the Federal Highway Administration. I wonder why the Valencia Elementary School staff and 600+ student families are not being more vocal about this?

ATTEND THE PAJARO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD MEETING TO LOBBY FOR THE STUDENTS: Wednesday April 26, 7pm at the Watsonville Civic Center (top floor) KION television did a report on the issues April 5.  Could it be possible that the County might be stalling the Valencia Road repair / temporary bridge to make life easier for the Aptos Village road construction project?  Hmmmmm…..

IS THE 1928 APTOS CREEK BRIDGE SAFE?
It has been made clear by County Counsel, in response to Public Information Act requests, that the County has NO recent inspection reports for the 1928 Aptos Creek Bridge for storm-related damage, but gave me multiple photos taken of the erosion at the bridge abutments.  The 2013 CalTrans civil engineer inspection report recommended Counsel the bridge be closely monitored during storm events and closed if necessary.  CalTrans engineers routinely inspect the bridge every 24 months but do not do special inspections.  The bridge was inspected in 2015 and is due for that routine assessment this fall.   Where are the County Public Works engineers?  Call or write John Presleigh.  John.Presleigh@santacruzcounty.us>  454-2160

OTHER PUBLIC MEETINGS WORTH ATTENDING:

1. County Planning Department and Housing Advisory Commission will hold a public meeting to roll out the new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU, aka ‘Granny Unit’) regulations:  April 26, 6pm, Simpkins Family Swim Center, Live Oak.
2. First-Ever County Parks Department Strategic Plan Public Workshops:

     April 26  Ben Lomond: San Lorenzo Valley at Highlands County Park  6:30pm-8:30pm
     April 27  Watsonville at the Civic Center Community Room  6:30pm-8:30pm
     May 2    Davenport at Pacific Elementary School (50 Ocean Street) 6:30pm-8:30pm
     May 6    Aptos at Aptos Village Park   10AM-NOON
     May 11  Live Oak at Simpkins Family Swim Center community Room 6:30pm-8:30pm

You will find more information on the County Parks Dept. website, along with a quick survey you can take online.  And you can visit www.scparks.com/strategicplan for updates throughout the process, and feel free to contact Park Planner, Will Fourt, at will.fourt@santacruzcounty.us or 831-454-7910 with any questions or comments.

3. 3.  County Zoning Administrator Public Hearing. Friday, April 21  9am  5th Floor of 701     Ocean Street County Building

     Item #2 will consider approval of a large winery and event center in the rural Pleasant Valley area of Corralitos (APN 107-111-32, -76,-77,-79,-80). This is essentially approving an application of the County Planning Department’s Code Modernization before it has even been vetted by the public or approved by the Board of Supervisors.  This issue was eloquently pointed out to the Board last Tuesday by rural resident Ms. Debbie Hencke. The Code Modernization environmental review report is  currently six months behind schedule and has not been made available publicly.

Another possible instance of applying the un approved codes was apparent in last Tuesday’s Board of Supervisor’s “Written Correspondence” Item #D: Application for Alcoholic Beverage License by Steelhead Engineering, Inc., located at 1850 Day Valley Road, Aptos.  I tried to ask the Board about that curious item, but was told that I had had plenty of opportunity to comment on items on the agenda.  The Board adjourned and my podium microphone was turned off. I just wanted to ask why an engineering company in rural Aptos would need an alcoholic beverage license?  Well, now I know that if one wants to comment on any piece of written correspondence included in the Board’s agenda packet, you comment during Open Public Comment, rather than waiting for the end of the meeting, like I did (there is no information about this procedure included on the agenda).

THE NEW STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING BILL…WILL IT HELP SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FIX THE ROADS?

The Governor and legislature quickly passed SB1, the new legislation that increases gas excise taxes by 12 cents/gallon and diesel excise taxes by 20 cents/gallon, along with increasing diesel sales taxes and, effective 2020, an annual $100 fee for Zero Emission Vehicles. 

According to information by Supervisor Zach Friend published in the Aptos Times, this will bring $6 million to Santa Cruz County’s coffers when everything is fully implemented.  That is not really very much, considering the Aptos Village Phase I and II Traffic Improvement Projects alone will total over $4 million.  But, every little bit helps…I just want to know that the money will be used for what has been promised, and will benefit the greater public good. 

THE COUNTY’S $20,000 CONSULTANT SEARCH FOR NEW COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CONTINUES

The County has hired consultant Peckham & McKenney to help find the replacement for Ms. Susan Mauriello, who will retire this July after holding the County Administrator Office (CAO) job for 27 years.  I looked again at the consultant website and was glad to see that there is now more information about what qualifications are necessary and what the job really entails (there was only a nice description of how beautiful the scenery is in Santa Cruz when the position announcement was initially launched on April 1). I found it interesting that in the needed profile, a successful candidate will need to “Identify opportunities and create a plan to develop new sources of revenue” and “Create a short term and long term plan for infrastructure improvements.” It does not mention that the County Budget is currently in $8.1 million deficit or that the CAO reported to the Board of Supervisors in February that there may not be money available from the General Fund for major capital infrastructure improvements.  I suppose that will all come out during interviews, which are scheduled  for May 15-19 and finalist interviews for June 2-3. Applications for the job will be accepted through May 8, according to Peckham & McKenney website information. 

I wonder if we make our requests known now regarding what we, as the taxpayers, would like to see in our CAO, if it would make a difference?  The selection process, I have been told, is not open to the public.

Contact the Board of Supervisors:

Greg Caput Greg.Caput@santacruzcounty.us
Ryan Coonerty Ryan.Coonerty@santacruzcounty.us
Zach Friend Zach.Friend@santacruzcounty.us
John Leopold John.Leopold@santacruzcounty.us
Bruce McPherson Bruce.McPherson@santacruzcounty.us
phone (831) 454-2200

As Ms. Mauriello said herself during last week’s Aptos Chamber of Commerce breakfast, where she was guest speaker, we all need to speak up for what matters to us, because silence is the same as acceptance.  Gee, I think I will really take her advice to heart….and action.

APTOS COMMUNITY SUPPORTS THE APTOS/LA SELVA FIREFIGHTERS
Last Thursday, April 13, about 200 residents and fire agency supporters filled the engine bays at Aptos fire station to register support for the Aptos/La Selva firefighter local 3535 at the Board meeting.  Recently, the firefighters UNANIMOUSLY VOTED NO CONFIDENCE in Chief Jon Jones.  Public testimony lasted for over two hours, all in support of the Local 3535, and asking that the Board NOT extend Chief Jones’ contract by two years.  Some, including me, asked for Chief Jones to resign immediately.  Supporters from other fire agencies throughout the area also testified in support.  To be clear, the issue is not about the contracts, but rather about the firefighters’ concerns regarding lack of leadership, communication and allowing important community services to diminish.  The shocking news is that three well-respected employees, Deputy Fire Chief Carol Wallace, Division Chief Mike Conrad, and Fire Captain Bob Snyder all retired this year, earlier than they had planned, simply because work conditions are so deplorable under Chief Jones.  I have worked with these people over many years, and always have been impressed by their professional dedication to respectfully serving the public. 

Unfortunately, Board member Mr. Vince Hurley published vicious and inaccurate accusations against the firefighters in the Santa Cruz Sentinel.  These accusations were all debunked by multiple testimonies of Local 3535 leadership.  At the end, Mike Conrad stood before the audience and said, “Ladies and gentlemen, everything you have heard here tonight is true.” 

The Board took no action on the matter, since it was not on the agenda for the night.  Oddly, there was NO coverage of the meeting in any of the local news media….Hmmmmm…..

Contact the Aptos/La Selva Board members with your thoughts:

Bob Spisak BSpisak.aptlsfd@gmail.com (Current Board President)
George Lucchesi GLucchesi.alsfpd@gmail.com
Joe Foster JFoster.alsfpd@gmail.com
Jim Abendschan JAbendschan.alsfpd@gmail.com
Vince Hurley VHurley.alsfpd@gmail.com

The firefighters of Local 3535 have served the Aptos and La Selva communities well for 87 years, as well as other areas of the County and State on mutual aid calls.  Now they need our help. 

Contact the news media while you are at it….why is there silence on this issue?

FILL OUR PRISONS…WITH IMMIGRANTS??
The Register-Pajaronian published a very interesting article “Empty jails hope to cash in on illegal immigration crackdown” (4/1/17, page B1).  In Texas, several county governments went into debt to build jails, hoping to create jobs for local residents with contracts to house inmates from other counties as well as prisoners for the state and federal governments.

However, “a decline in crime and an increase in alternative sentencing reduced the Texas prisoner population and created a glut of jail space.”  One would think that could be taken as good news, but apparently not by the County Administrative Officers (CAO) in Texas. These counties are struggling with the debt but are now hopeful, thanks to Trump’s executive order tweets, that there will be federal contracts available “to house some of the immigrants expected to be detained in President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.  Or they can sell the vacant detention centers to private prison companies that aim to do the same.”

“Other counties have entered into agreements with private prison companies to renovate their empty facilites in expectation of reopening if immigrant detention opens opportunities.”

According to the article, ICE would not discuss how many beds the agency might need or it’s timetable for obtaining them.  I don’t think that is good news, do you?

“At least one advocacy group is wary of the secretive process and of putting more detainees in privately-run faciliies after complaints and violations of inmate-care standards.”

Maybe we need to begin asking Santa Cruz County and City government officials about this issue.  The County Board of Supervisors recently approved closing the County’s Blaine Street Women’s Jail and moving the inmates to Watsonville’s Rountree facility.  What are the plans for that empty jail?  It is always good to ask questions and to expect honest answers….and know what to do if the answers given do not seem quite clear.

THE SEARCH HAS BEGUN…OUR NEW COUNTY CAO!!!
County Administrative Officer (CAO) Ms. Susan Mauriello is retiring this July.  The County is paying $20,000 for consultants Peckham & McKenney in Roseville to search for her replacement.  Here is what their website posted April 1, 2017:

County Administrative Officer
County of Santa Cruz, California

      With its natural beauty apparent in pristine coastal beaches, lush redwood forests, and rich farmland, Santa Cruz County enjoys an ideal Mediterranean climate with low humidity and 300 days of sunshine a year. The County’s approximately 270,000 residents enjoy an excellent quality of living. Santa Cruz County has a workforce of 2,452 and FY 2016/17 all fund budget of $720.7 million. Appointed by a dynamic five-member Board of Supervisors, the County Administrative Officer is responsible for the administration of all County services and activities and provides direct and indirect administrative direction to department heads and general direction to the CAO’s Office staff. A Bachelor’s degree in public or business administration or a related field required; Master’s degree preferred. The retiring CAO’s annual salary is $290,040; appointment DOQ. Filing deadline is May 8, 2017.

Resumes are acknowledged within 2 business days.

Here is the Peckham & McKenney website.

I wonder why the CAO’s advertisement has no other links providing information about desired qualities, available support staff and important local issues, as there are in nearly all of the other jobs advertised on the website?  Maybe admitting the County is in a chronic budget deficit would scare too many people away?  Maybe Ms. Mauriello has already chosen her successor, so the website search is just cursory?  County Department Directors were supposedly consulted for the job description…   Hmmm……

It worries me that Santa Cruz County budget is at $8.1 million deficit (down from last year’s $12.8 million deficit), and that according to Ms. Mauriello’s mid-year report to the Supervisors, there may not be any money available from the general fund for infrastructure capital improvements.  Think about that as you navigate road closures and culvert failures.  Will Valencia Road and Old San Jose Road ever get repaired?

PUBLIC HEARING FOR APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE HISTORIC APPLE BARN
It pays to read over the microscopic-print legal advertisements in the local newspapers.  That is where I saw notice in last Friday’s Santa Cruz Sentinel (3/31) of a public hearing on Monday, April 10,  for proposed changes to the Aptos Village Project’s Historic Preservation Plan by the County Historic Resources Commission.  That will be at 701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, 4th Floor Planning Department Conference Room at 9:30am. The public is being given the opportunity to weigh-in on the Historic Resources Commission “to consider a proposed amendment to the Historic Resource Preservation Plan for the Apple Barn in Aptos Village.  The proposed amendment includes the addition of skylights, minor changes to the deck (former loading dock), and reduction in the number of new doors, and requires review and approval by the Commission.  The Commission will also review plans for retention of historic single wall construction and floorboards as required.  The Project address is 151 Aptos Village Way, (previously 417 Trout Gulch Rd.) in Aptos (Aptos Village).  The applicant is Aptos Village LLC.  For more information contact Annie Murphy, Santa Cruz County Planning Dept., at 831-454-3111.” The fact is, it is also your opportunity to bring forth newly-discovered significant information that could require further environmental review.  Hmmmm…..

The Assessor Parcel Number (APN) is 041-011-03.  Take a look at the Planning Dept. Website…you learn interesting things by researching the building permit status by parcel.

Please attend the April 10 Public Hearing at 9:30am if you can, or send your comments to Ms. Annie Murphy

APTOS VILLAGE…MANY DISTURBING THINGS…Regarding the County road work in the Aptos Village, here are some interesting facts:

1. The project cost is nearly $2 million.  The work includes moving a bus stop, adding a traffic light, adding two dedicated turn lanes to serve the shopping center owned by Aptos Village Project developer Mr. Joe Appenrodt, removing and replacing 200′ of railroad track, new railroad crossing arms and cement crossing pad, and sidewalks and bike lanes on Trout Gulch Road.  None of this work is urgently needed.  All of the work is being done to benefit the Aptos Village Project, with very little money being paid by the developers for the improvements.

2. There will no longer be bike lanes on Soquel Drive, in order to make room for new dedicated turn lanes for the Starbucks/Bay Fed Center (owned by Mr. Joe Appenrodt).  There will be a bike lane added to a brief portion of Trout Gulch Road in the Village area.

3. The new bus stop location will not allow the buses to get completely out of the lane of westbound traffic when at the new bus bay near Trout Gulch/Soquel Drive.  This will create a traffic hazard, as there is poor line-of-sight visibility for motorists and cyclists coming from the underpass nearby.  The representative from Santa Cruz Metro was puzzled by his predecessor’s approval of such a questionable design.  The new stop will be at a slope that may or may not be ADA-compliant.  The County Public Works Department was uncooperative with the Metro manager’s many requests for information on the final design.

The bus stop is being moved to make way for the Aptos Village Project’s new gateway entrance on Soquel Drive via the new Parade Street connector.  

4.  The railroad bed and the area adjacent to the tracks to be excavated has not been disturbed since 1882-83 when Southern Pacific Railroad replaced the narrow gauge rail lines with standard gauge track.  The area where the bus stop is planned was built by Chinese laborers and the origin of the fill soil is unknown.  When trenching was conducted recently nearby as Soquel Creek Water District was installing new water mains in the Aptos Village Project, Native American and archaeological observers found historic and pre-historic artifacts.  If the fill soil for the railroad bed work were taken locally (very likely) from the area of the Aptos Village Project construction site, there could very likely be significant artifacts under the railroad bed and where the bus bay excavation is planned.  To date, the County has not even mentioned the historic significance of the soils.  I have contacted County Supervisor Zach Friend, Public Works Director Mr. John Presleigh, and the construction foreman, Mr. Richard Simmer,  of John Madonna Construction Co. from San Luis Obispo.

5. Also concerning the soils beneath the railroad bed is the very real possibility of contamination.  The County has not brought this aspect of the excavation work to public light either, but considering the historic use of the railroad bed, there will be contaminants found.  Therefore, it is important that the soils be properly sampled and tested for contamination, and remediated accordingly.  It is critical that the soils do not get used as fill in the nearby Aptos Village Project or anywhere else if contamination is found.

6.  Phase II of the County-sponsored Aptos Village road projects will include creating the new railroad crossing on Soquel Drive to make a gateway to the Aptos Village Project via the new Parade Street entrance.  In order to receive approval for the new private railroad crossing, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) required two existing private railroad crossings in the County be closed.  County Public Works Sr. Traffic Engineer Mr. Jack Sohriakoff chose them: 1) the main ingress/egress for the Bayview Hotel and 2) the Warrenella Road crossing for Davenport’s New Town residents.

Recently, I attended a Davenport Community meeting (it was regarding plans for the Cemex Plant) and learned that the Warrenella Road crossing closure had been taken off the table.  That was confirmed by Mr. Felix Ko at the PUC.  He said the County is still planning to close the Bayview Hotel ingress/egress but now the main approval will be revisited.  

THAT ALLOWS FOR PROTEST FROM THE PUBLIC.
Contact: Public Utilities Commission Senior Utilities Engineer Mr. Felix Ko

Bayview Hotel owner, Ms. Cristina Locke, has protested the taking of her land and ingress/egress all along.  To date, no County representative or Aptos Village Project developer has contacted her about compensation or agreements.  Now, she is being forced to seek legal action to defend her private property rights which were established in 1876 when Mr. Jose Arano granted the Santa Cruz Railroad an easement over his land.

Regarding the Aptos Village Project:

I recently met with County Assistant Planning Director Ms. Wanda Williams to ask about some odd issues regarding the Aptos Village Project permits. (Planning Director Ms. Kathleen Previsich has had to recuse herself from any work on this Project because her husband has greatly profited by the development.) She could not answer my questions, and brought in County Building Official Mr. Martin Heaney.  He was also puzzled.  What do you think?

1. It appears from the Santa Cruz County Planning Department website (http://planningapplicationstatus.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Pln?n=101027) that the Master Application for the Aptos Village Project has expired, as of last September 25, 2016.  It was extended by 24 months once already under the provision of AB116.  That bill allows for one extension of 24 months.  Therefore, all work being done on the Project appears to be violating the Master Application permit agreement.  I brought this to the attention of Assistant Planning Director, Ms. Wanda Williams, over two weeks ago.  She could not explain the discrepancy and neither could Mr. Martin Heaney, County Building Official. 

2. There are no permits issued for the foundation work  for the planned three-story building that Barry Swenson Builder crews recently began constructing behind the Apple Barn. 

The soils in this area were identified by Haro & Kasunich’s geotechnical studies as high risk for liquefaction in a major earthquake.  Developer Barry Swenson Builder subsequently presented a second geotechnical report from a different consultant that identifies the area as low risk for liquefaction.  Notes in the County Planning Department files ask for an explanation of the discrepancy, but I have not seen any such document in my research.  No building permit has been issued for this three-story building to be attached to the historic Hihn Apple Barn, destined to become a New Leaf Market, but extensive foundation work was begun early this month. 

THAT FOUNDATION WORK STOPPED LAST WEEK.  Hmmmmm…… 

3. Similarly, there is no permit issued for improvements to the historic Hihn Apple Barn.  There was a permit issued for the relocation of the structure, but not for further work.  Crews have been working inside the Barn constantly since the Barn was relocated last autumn. 

That work seems to have also stopped or diminished this week.

Other Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN) to check for the Phase I Project are 041-011-33 (a massive retaining wall is under construction, but since the Master Application permit has expired, the development improvements would also seem to require new permit approval), and 041-011-41, 041-011-42.  There have been new APN’s assigned to the parcels, but the Planning Department website shows no permits applied for under those new numbers.  The numbers I have listed here are mostly the old numbers.

4. One parcel (APN 041-011-03) has an approved winter grading permit (http://planningapplicationstatus.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Pln?n=151334) that was issued in December, 2015.  That permit is valid for three years, according to Ms. Carolyn Burke, County Environmental Planner.  There have been repeated serious stormwater runoff problems with the site.  None of the erosion control and storm water retention sediment pond installations, mandated by the approval of the permit, have been followed.  I have video recorded multiple instances of the storm water and construction debris flowing from the construction site and directly into the storm drain to Valencia and Trout Creeks (and ultimately to the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary).  I have filed requests for action and also complaints with the County Planning Department, but no action was taken. 

I took storm water samples and samples of the sediment to the County Environmental Health Department, asking for analysis.  That agency refused the samples.  I left the samples with Ms. Burke, the County Environmental Planner, asking for analysis.  She told me later she did nothing with the samples.

I also at that time took samples to a private lab for stormwater analysis.  That lab reported high lead, arsenic, phosphates and nitrates in the sample.  I took a second set of samples to the private lab during a subsequent storm water runoff problem from the construction site, and am awaiting the results.  I have notified the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and have been notified by Ms. Julie Dyer of that agency that she is conducting an investigation.  You may view the video evidence of this and other environmental problems in the video on the right.

5. Also, there is the unresolved soil contamination problem on the construction site, as a result of Barry Swenson Builder crews illegally removing a 5,000 diesel tank that was buried near Granite Way.  The County Environmental Health specialists never saw the tank or the hole where the diesel and other contaminants were located because Barry Swenson Builder crews removed the tank during the night and covered everything up before the County could get there eight days later.  The site indicated as the tank site is NOT the true site…there are multiple witnesses who saw the tank being removed and the liquid welling up from the hole.  I am one of them.  Neither the County nor the Regional Water Quality Control Board ever interviewed any of the witnesses.  The case was quickly closed without proper process, such as sampling for groundwater contamination.

IF ANY OF THIS CONCERNS YOU, PLEASE WRITE A LETTER TO:
County Supervisor Zach Friend, Zach.Friend@santacruzcounty.us
County Public Works Director Mr. John Presleigh, John.Presleigh@santacruzcounty.us
County Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Specialist Mr. John Gerbrandt, John.Gerbrandt@santacruzcounty.us
County Planning Assistant Director Ms. Wanda Williams, Wanda.Williams@santacruzcounty.us
County Building Official Mr. Martin Heaney, Martin.Heaney@santacruzcounty.us

Letter to Editor: Mr. Erik Chalhoub echalhoub@register-pajaronian.com
               Mr. Don Miller dmiller@santacruzsentinel.com

if you want to write an Op Ed piece or Letter to the Editor  at www.santacruzsentinel.com/opinion

San Jose Mercury News: http://www.mercurynews.com/2013/07/23/how-to-submit-a-letter-or-opinion-column-to-the-mercury-news/  Public Utilities Commission Senior Utilities Engineer Mr. Felix Ko  

WHAT WILL YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD BE LIKE IN THE FUTURE?
Plan to attend one of the workshops being presented by Associated Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) and find out what dense and towering developments are headed your way.

Water?  What water?

April 6 Hollister Community Center, 300 West Street (6pm-7:30pm)
April 10  Watsonville Civic Center, 275 Main Street (top level) 6pm-7:30pm
April 13  Steinbeck Center, Vista Room, 1 Main Street, Salinas  6pm-7:30pm

More information at www.ambag.org

AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION ON USING STORMWATER TO RECHARGE DEPLETED AQUIFERS
I attended the excellent program at the Hotel Paradox by Dr. Andy Fisher, UCSC Professor of Hydrology, and Dr. Daniel Mountjoy, representing the non-profit ‘Sustainable Conservation’.  Both spoke about the issue of groundwater overdraft and low-tech methods for recharging them.

Much of what Dr. Fisher discussed related to the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency’s work since formation in the 1980’s to solve the overdraft problem.  Currently, about 20% of the pumping from the area’s private agricultural wells are adding to overdraft by 12,000AcreFeet/Year.  That is an improvement, but still the seawater is advancing inland at the rate of about 9″/day.

Three threats will continue to exacerbate the problem:

1. Demand for water is increasing
2.  There is a shift in land use, creating more surface land space that is impermeable
3.  Climate change could bring more intense rainfall in shorter time frames, not allowing for the land to absorb the rainfall and recharge the groundwater.

Capturing stormwater runoff…all that water gushing down the storm drains and into the swollen creeks…and collecting it in ponds for groundwater recharge through natural percolation could easily, according to Dr. Fisher, help solve this area’s critical overdraft crisis in a low-tech, low-energy demand way.  

Working with the Resource Conservation District (RCD), a pilot study project on a 172-acre farm in Pajaro Valley will be worth watching.  The 4-acre settling pond will not only recharge the groundwater table but also improve stream water quality overall by removing agricultural fertilizers and contaminants from the overall runoff into the creek nearby. What’s the incentive for the farmer to reduce production area to dedicate land for a recharge basin? Money is always a strong one.  The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency is developing a program similar to net-metering used by solar panel owners who produce power for the electrical grid.  In the case of groundwater recharge, it will be a bit more complicated and relies on good verification that the system is indeed recharging the aquifer.   The pilot study will use an independent third-party certifier (UCSC and the RCD) to determine how much stormwater is percolating into the aquifer.  Based on that information, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency will pay for the rebate to the farmer’s water bill.  Currently,  farmers pay between $203/AcreFoot to $359/AcreFoot for the water they pump from their ag wells, depending on location of the well with respect to seawater intrusion threat (wells closer to the coast are assessed highest).  

Dr. Fisher explained that other areas of Santa Cruz County are being evaluated as possible recharge sites, depending on geology and current land use.  Recently, he met with local water agencies and County staff to overlay those areas with GIS parcel maps to identify possible property owners to approach for further pilot studies.  He stressed that, with good monitoring and collaboration, collecting stormwater runoff can help return the region’s pumping demands to sustainable levels.

I thought it was interesting to hear that an acre of strawberries requires 2.5AcreFeet/year to produce and that these fields are covered by plastic mulch that reduced groundwater recharge by rainfall.  

Find more information at www.recharge.org

The second speaker, Dr. Daniel Mountjoy, discussed similar projects occurring in the Central Valley.  He talked about that area’s ground subsidence…actual sinking of the land due to recent and sudden increased agricultural pumping as a result of no water available from the California Aquaduct.  He explained that many farmers changed to drip irrigation, in an effort to use less water than flood irrigation, but actually depleted groundwater recharge levels by doing so.

“We have to build on natural processes, not fight them,” he said, and return the rivers to flood plains in a controlled way.  To that end, one farmer did just that about six years ago, and invited his neighboring farmers to take a look at his findings.  Now, Dr. Helen Dahlke, at the University of California, Davis (UCD) is on board with pilot studies to determine the long-range effects on crops where the fields are allowed to flood in the winter storm months.  

These studies are financially supported by such groups as the Almond Board and Farm Bureau, but also several large food processing companies, such as Campbell’s, General Mills, Nestle and Anhueser-Busch are also donating large sums.  These sponsors are concerned about the threat of losing the large supply of foods for their processing plants nearby if California farmers run out of water.

Find more information at www.suscon.org

I SURE HOPE THAT SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT WILL TAKE NOTE OF THESE ENCOURAGING STUDIES and NOT proceed with the PureWater (“PoopWater“) Soquel Project, which calls for massive amounts of energy and perfectly-functioning high-tech systems to pump 3.1 million gallons of sewage water each day into the aquifer via injection wells.  No ponds.  No control of contaminant accidents.  Not good.

LET THE PEOPLE VOTE…..everyone who depends on this water source for their safe drinking water should have a chance to weigh in via a Prop. 218 ballot process.

THE APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT HAS A BIG RECHARGE POND OVERFLOWING INTO THE CREEK

Last week’s gentle rains filled the recently-graded excavation site adjacent to Trout Gulch Road, with lots of erosion from recent massive amounts of earth work contributing to high sediment content of the uncontrolled stormwater runoff.  Where are the erosion control practices?  Where are those five temporary sediment retention basins indicated on the Drainage and Erosion Control Plan approved by Santa Cruz County Environmental Planner Ms. Carolyn Burke?  That was all required on paper when Barry Swenson Builder was able to get a winter grading permit approved in December, 2015.  

I think it should be revoked.  Why doesn’t the County Inspector take note of these Stormwater  Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) violations?  Maybe the Regional Water Quality Control Board will?

Last week, I met with Ms. Burke’s supervisor, Assistant Planning Director, Ms. Wanda Williams, to discuss the problems.  Ms. Burke was on vacation.  Ms. Williams was not interested in the stormwater and sediment samples I brought to her office.  She also did not seem interested in the lab analysis report of the stormwater samples I collected last month, which are high in lead, arsenic, nitrate and phosphate.    Hmmm…

There were many questions regarding permits for the Aptos Village Project that she could not answer, so she asked Building Department Official Mr. Martin Heaney to step in.  He also was mystified.  I was surprised to learn from him that the Santa Cruz County Building Department only deals with electrical permits, not anything to do with grading, drainage or fire code issues.  

He thought it is okay that Barry Swenson Builder is running an extension cord from the former Hihn Apple Barn electrical service through puddled water over to the construction office trailers, and then on to the construction crews working inside the Barn in it’s new location.  “What about rodents chewing the insulation and creating a fire hazard inside the historic Barn when the cord remains in the Barn and lights are left on all night?”  I asked.  He thought it was okay as long as the contractor examined the cords daily. I was glad that Ms. Williams asked Mr. Heaney to ask Barry Swenson Builder to remove all electrical extension cords from the Barn at the end of each work day.  I wonder if they will?

IF I HAD BEEN ABLE TO GET THERE, I WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR EXPLANATIONS

There were three items on the March 21 County Board of Supervisor Agenda that I would have asked to be taken off the Consent Agenda and made into Regular Agenda items for discussion.  Unfortunately, heavy traffic and an overflowing parking lot at 701 Ocean Street made me later than usual, and I missed the action on the Consent Agenda.  I would have liked to have gotten answers to these questions:

1.  Why did the Department of Public Works ask for and receive approval for the ability to hire five outside civil engineer consultants for $1 MILLION EACH annually for a contract period of three to five years to work on plans for storm repair projects?  Didn’t Public Works Department Director Mr. John Presleigh tell the Board at their February 28 public meeting that “We’re going to do all the engineering in-house to save money.”?

When I asked the Dept. Of Public Works how many civil engineers there are on staff, I was told to go ask County Counsel.  Really?  Mr. Nefouse in that department could not tell me, but said he would send me an answer before the Board met.  I received a general list of all staff titles for the Public Works Department, and it was difficult to determine how many civil engineers are on staff.   I searched on ‘Transparent California’ and determined that there are 22 of them.  Shouldn’t they be able to handle the work load?  

Well, apparently not.  The Board approved this $15 – $25 MILLION EXPENSE.  Remember, the County is already $8.1 million in deficit.

2.  Why did the Sheriff Department get Board approval for an additional $30,000 to pay Central Coast Landscape Maintenance for storm-related tree damage and drainage problems?  I used to work in landscape maintenance and that seems like alot of money.  I happened to drive by the Sheriff Center on Soquel Avenue frontage road and Chanticleer and took a look.

No tree damage.  No big wash-outs.   What I did see was an excavated area next to the building itself that had some fresh concrete next to the foundation.  I am no building expert, but it seems to me that might be something the contractor who built that brand new Sheriff Center ought to be liable for, given there was a Performance Agreement.  

But since that contractor is Barry Swenson Builder, it seems that the County officials have bent over backwards yet again and expect taxpayers to fix the problem instead.  I don’t think that is right.  Do you?  Maybe the Grand Jury would be interested in this $30,000 ticket?

3.  Soquel Village will soon have parking meters everywhere to bring in money to maintain the two County-owned parking lots.  Last year, the Department of Public Works put forth a ballot measure asking property owners in the Village to form a new assessment district to pay for this.  It was rejected by over 80% of those voters.

So, the Board of Supervisors approved the placement of parking meters in those lots and for all on-street parking in Soquel Village to collect the money, at 50 cents/hour.  It will take lots of money to buy, install, maintain and read those meters, so Department of Public Works will loan the effort $100,000 as start-up money, payable over the next three years. Isn’t that generous?  

That $100,000 would help repair roads, such as Valencia Road in Aptos, where the elementary school closed due to unsafe road conditions.  I wonder if the parking meters will need a consultant, too?

SPEAKING OF VALENCIA ROAD CLOSURE…

                      HOW COME NELSON ROAD IS PASSABLE?

I took a drive up to Scotts Valley to see how the County was able to re-establish the route for Nelson Road (not far up Lockhart Gulch Road) over a creek where a large culvert failed in recent storms. That situation is interesting and similar to the Valencia Road conditions.  

However, County Supervisor Bruce McPherson was able to get that temporary one-lane bridge installed by pushing hard to get money quickly from Congresswoman Anna Eshoo.  Two railroad flat cars were placed side-by-side to create a sturdy one-lane bridge on rock and timber abutments.  Simple and effective, and it got done within three weeks after the storm closed the road.

So, why is Valencia Road still closed?  Why did it take nearly a month for Supervisor Zach Friend to visit the site with Congressman Jimmy Panetta?  Why isn’t this fast-tracked to get the job done to allow Valencia Elementary School students back to their class rooms?  

Gee, I wonder if it could be related to the County wanting to keep the consequent reduction of traffic in Aptos Village area while the road work supporting the Aptos Village Project occurs?  Lane closures begin Monday, March 27 and will happen through July 17.  “The motoring public is asked to avoid this area if possibleor be prepared for delays of up to 20 minutes.” according to Mr. John Presleigh, Director of Public Works.  What about the residents and merchants in the area who have no choice but to travel through this area?  Well, keep that pesky school traffic out of the way….

Please tell me again why the taxpayers are footing the bill to move a bus stop, install turn lanes, replace 200′ of rail track, and add a traffic light….”for the Aptos Village Project”, again according to Mr. Presleigh of Public Works, as reported in the Santa Cruz Sentinel Coast Lines (3/8/17)?  

The Regional Transportation Commission has approved two grants totaling $1,300,000 and also allowed $137,000 to be transferred from the Calabasas School Safe Pedestrian Project all to go to the Aptos Village Project road improvements.  The Aptos Village Project developers (Barry Swenson Builder, Joe Appenrodt, Pete Testorff)  are paying very little.  

The County has bent over backwards to reward them with other concessions, too, and a draft Development Agreement in 2013 offered $5 million payback from County coffers to Barry Swenson Builder to re-imburse them for  internal road and right-of-way expenses.  Wow.  I wonder if that includes the hefty sum Barry Swenson Builder paid County Planning Department Kathy Previsich’s husband for an easement of a narrow strip of land adjacent to Granite Way in the Project?  Hmmmm….

Maybe the County Grand Jury would like to know about this ticket, too.  Maybe even the State Attorney General….

By the way, the only source of information the public has is a blog on the County Public Works website:  aptosvillageimprovements/blog  But as of last week, it had not been updated with the new March 27 construction start time… then again, neither has the flashing road sign at Trout Gulch and Cathedral Drive.  Hmmm…..

When asked if staff investigating the problem might take soil samples, County Environmental Health staff replied “No, but we could require the developer to do that.”  Do you think that Barry Swenson Builder crews would do a thorough and honest job of sampling?  Hmmmmm…….

BARRY SWENSON BUILDER REFUSED TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS’ REQUESTS TO PROTECT THE HISTORIC HIHN APPLE BARN.
Last weekend, crews negligently left a large ladder propped up from the ground level and leading into the open door of the 125-year-old historic Hihn Apple Barn.  Lots of odd things happen in that construction area at night, such as historic artifact scavenging, illegal diesel tanks leaving…   It seemed to me that a ladder providing easy access into the Barn could spell trouble.

That is why I phoned the Sheriff’s non-emergency number (471-1121) to ask that a deputy investigate and contact the developer to remove the public nuisance ladder and easy access to the historic Barn.  I also phoned the “24-hour Disturbance Response” number that the County requires to be posted on site for the public benefit.  That number for the Aptos Village Project (475-7100) is Barry Swenson Builder’s business hour phone and is only active Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.  Responsive, indeed.

The Sheriff kindly investigated the site and phoned to confirm the ladder access to the Barn and to let me know that she had no way to access the construction site to fix the problem.  She said she would work with the developer to get the problem resolved.

At the end of the following day, the ladder access problem remained.  I phoned the Aptos/La Selva Fire station directly and asked that the public nuisance and potential hazard for a warming fire set inside by area vagrants be corrected.  The officer assured me he would discuss the problem with his Chief and get back to me.  The ladder remains as I write this article and I have received no reply from either the Fire Department or Barry Swenson Builder’s “24-hour Disturbance” staff.  Wow.

It sure would be a shame if the Hihn Apple Barn had the same unfortunate accident as the Rispin Mansion did when Barry Swenson Builder was working there, wouldn’t it?  Well, think good thoughts for the Barn and phone the Fire Department quickly if you see suspicious activity in the area.

Tell me again how those recent lights were left on in the Barn all night when there is no electricity legally hooked up to the construction site?  Hmmmm….

PROTEST THE COUNTY SPENDING $2 MILLION TO HELP APTOS VILLAGE DEVELOPERS AT THE EXPENSE OF VALENCIA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL KIDS AND 1500 RURAL RESIDENTS!

****Join your neighbors Friday (3/24) 4pm-6pm, Saturday (3/25) 9am-noon, Monday (3/27) 7:30am-9:30am) at the intersection of Trout Gulch Road and Soquel Drive to PROTEST the County spending $2 MILLION to help Aptos Village Project developers instead of Valencia Elementary School and 1500 rural households affected by the indefinate closure of Valencia Road.

The warning signs are now in place on Soquel Drive (blocking the lane of traffic for Rancho del Mar customers) and also at the Cathedral Drive/Trout Gulch Road intersection…”EXPECT DELAYS ON TROUT GULCH: 8:30am-4:30pm beginning March 27 and through July 17″.  

Gee, can the County really justify spending this $2 million to move the westbound Metro bus stop and create dedicated turn lanes “necessary for roadway and storm drainage improvements for the Aptos Village Project, according to John Presleigh, the county public works director.” ????? (direct quote from March 8, 2017 Santa Cruz Sentinel ‘Coast Lines’)

I think the County’s priorities, and motives, are questionable.

Metro maintenance managers (I like that alliteration, don’t you?) gave a tentative nod of approval to the relocation site a long time ago, but there have been significant changes made to the design, location and specifications since.  No one from Metro seems to have been consulted about this project recently, and according to Metro staff, COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS IS NOT RESPONDING TO REPEATED REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION.  Gee, I guess I’m not the only one that gets ignored, but that gives me no comfort in this case.  

Contact Public Works Director John Presleigh <John.Presleigh@santacruzcounty.us>  454-2160, or County Supervisor Friend <zach.friend@santacruzcounty.us> 454-2200  (he loves to hear from you) and let them know you think the basic safety of 600+ school students and staff and 1500 rural households deserve highest priority for scarce public road repair money.

LOOKING ON THE HORIZON TOWARD SANTA CRUZ CITY….BIG CHANGES IN REZONING
Try to attend the Corridor Rezoning Public Hearing Thursday, March 23, 7pm at the Santa Cruz City Council Chambers.  Here is the link for more information.

This means TALL, DENSE changes on the horizon for the Water Street, Soquel Avenue, Ocean Street and Mission Street areas of Santa Cruz.   You might get a sense of what could come by looking at the new Palo Alto Medical Foundation Building on Mission…tall, with reduced setbacks.  However, the proposed height for these areas is 5-7 stories…much more imposing.  

I attended one of the public meetings held last year where the traffic study was presented for the proposed changes.  All major intersections would become so congested that the Level of Service (i.e., how long the average delay would be to travel through an intersection) drops  way below the City’s current acceptable level.  The mitigation proposed amazed me….to simply DOWNGRADE the City’s acceptable Level of Service to match what the proposed project would create.  Wow.  Oh, and also eliminate parking for the businesses in the Branciforte area.  

Attend the March 23 public hearing if you can, or send an e-mail to the Project Manager, Ms. Michelle King:  mking@cityofsantacruz.com

Water?  What water?

MIDCOUNTY GROUNDWATER AGENCY BOARD APPROVED SPENDING LOTS OF MONEY
Last week, the MidCounty Groundwater Agency (MGA) Board met to discuss more details about how the group consisting of Soquel Creek Water District, City of Santa Cruz, Central Water District, small private water companies and private well owners can satisfy the State’s requirement to have a plan ready by next year to heal the critically-overpumped Purisima Aquifer.  The meeting, held during evening hours at the Simpkins Swim Center, was well-attended.

The issues mostly centered around approving expenditure of money, money and more money.  With the exception of the Central Water District representative, the Board agreed to all proposed amounts and issues.  Central Water District serves about 800 customers in the Freedom Boulevard and Day Valley area of Aptos.   Unlike the other larger water agencies on the Board, Central Water District has a bare-bones staff and works very hard to keep the cost of water to its customers as low as possible.  

Soquel Creek Water District proposed that the MGA approve an additional $107,070 for their consultant, HydroMetrics, to continue working on a groundwater model that the MGA AdHoc Plan Committee will use to develop the required Plan for the State.  Keep in mind that one of the owners of HydroMetrics is Ms. Laura Brown, former General Manager of Soquel Creek Water District.

The Board discussed what value the model might have for decision-making and whether or not the information might even be available in time for their use to create the State-required Plan.   Soquel Creek District General Manager, Mr. Ron Duncan, said he’d have to check into it, but he thought that the contract between the District and HydroMetrics probably said something about that.  I asked if there is any deadline specified in the contract for the date of the deliverable information?  That question was ignored.  Hmmm…….

Two members of the MGA Board recused themselves from voting.  When the Central Water District representative voted “No” on the approval (he said something like “I cannot justify passing this large expense on to our customers”), Board President, Dr. Bruce Jaffee pointed out that the MGA By-Laws dictate that the agencies must unanimously approve any asset expenditures.

After a bit of silence, the bookkeeper for the group, which happens to be the Soquel Creek Water District’s bookkeeper and is paid by the MGA as part-time staff, pointed out that the model would not really be considered an “asset”, and therefore a unanamious vote of approval was not necessary….Well, that was handy !

With a sigh of relief, the Board then went on to approve $100,000 for a possible study by a Danish company of the sea water intrusion location within the offshore areas of the Purisima Aquifer.  I was glad to hear Mr. Duncan report that he had talked with Stanford scientist Dr. Rosemary Knight, who recently published results of her extensive seawater intrusion studies at the beaches between Seaside and Capitola, and that she was impressed with the Danish work.  Mr. Duncan discounted my comment.

Read about Dr. Knight’s great work here.

She points out there is a freshwater plume extending into the Bay that correlates with a stormwater collection pond in the Seaside area.  Why can’t our area make good use of stormwater collection and recharge, too?  The Pajaro area has a couple of pilot projects.  Take a look!

I was glad that Mr. Brian Lockwood, General Manager for the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, was in the audience.  He had not been made aware of the proposed study and asked that his agency be included, sharing the cost.  

The Board then went on further to approve hiring a legal consultant, just in case County Counsel cannot give an opinion.  Mr. John Ricker, representing the County Environmental Health Department, explained that no one on County Counsel is really proficient in water law.

I pointed out that Ms. Darcy Pruitt, the Senior Water Planner and recently hired by the MGA ($148,000/year) is a lawyer with specialty in water law and land use.  Her job is to check that the State-required Plan is legally fit.  Why hire another expensive lawyer?   My comment and question were ignored.  The Board also did not seem to care that Soquel Creek Water District had already paid the now-approved legal consultant a sizeable sum BEFORE the Board approved the action and told me I could not comment further on the matter.  Hmmmm…..

By the way, Boardmember Supervisor Zach Friend here left the meeting early…as he always does.

After Mr. Ricker gave the update on the Aquifer status, based on measurements and tests within the many monitoring wells, staff asked the HydroMetrics representative in the audience “Do you foresee improvements in the status of the aquifer within the next 5 years, based on your current studies?”  After hesitation, the man replied “A policy decision would change the aquifer, but a technological change would not.”  Does that mean he agrees with my many requests to Soquel Creek Water District to declare a moratorium and that the County needs to hold a public hearing to declare a countywide groundwater emergency?  Soquel Creek did the later in June, 2014 (I am correcting that date from last week’s column).  My requests are ignored and the Board of Supervisors does not respond to my letters asking for such.

Contact Soquel Creek Water District Board President Dr. Tom LaHue <TomL@soquelcreekwater.org>
Get more information about the MGA at www.midcountygroundwater.org

If you live in the San Lorenzo Valley or Scotts Valley areas, you need to know that a similar joint group is forming the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency.  There have already been meetings.

The next meeting is scheduled for April 19, 4pm-6pm.  I suggest you get a place at that table as soon as possible.  Sign up for notifications here:  www.smgwa.org

IS YOUR BACKYARD ON THE RADAR TO BE ACQUIRED?
The article “Group maps land protection strategy” in the Santa Cruz Sentinel (3/13/17) got my attention.  The Nature Conservancy has created maps identifying key areas “for local land trusts to use to identify private lands that could be strongholds for species threatened by climate change.”  The maps and information, “called the Terrestrial Resilience and Regional Connectivity reports and maps, cover some 355,000 square miles in Idaho, Oregon, Washington and parts of Montana, Nevada, California and Utah.”  

So far, the group has $6 million from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation that it is now distributing to land trusts to use for gaining “use-limiting easements or outright purchases.”  

Here is a link to information the group has related to the Eastern U.S.

Similarly, the Sempervirens Fund recently proposed ‘The Great Park’, and included taking a great deal of private land to create it.  Take a look at this map and see if your land is on their radar. If you are, you might want to join others who are concerned: http://www.rurallandalliance.org.

IN CLOSING.  I HAD FUN visiting the California State Library while in Sacramento last week.  I am researching Branciforte County, which is what the area from the Pajaro River north to at least Pescadero was called BEFORE becoming Santa Cruz County (and San Mateo County) in 1850.  Look for more about the 220th anniversary celebration of Villa de Branciforte coming up this July!

WRITE ONE LETTER.  MAKE ONE CALL.  MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE.
BUT DO SOMETHING.