|
Almanac
March 31, 2004
Open space district
expansion to coast: charges and responses
By Marion Softky
Over the last month, emotion and rhetoric have flown
sky high over the proposal of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District to expand its jurisdiction to include
the San Mateo County Coastside -- 140,000 acres -- from the southern boundary
of Pacifica to the Santa Cruz County line.
So far, more than 100 speakers have addressed the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) at two public hearings. Two more hearings are scheduled: on Tuesday, March 30, in Half Moon Bay, and Wednesday, April 7, in Redwood City. LAFCo, the county agency empowered to rule on changes of government boundaries, could make its decision in April.
Speakers have covered a wide range of opinion. Supporters
view the district -- known as "Mid-Pen" on the coast -- as providing a
tool to help save the open space and agriculture that make the San Mateo
County coast a national treasure. Opponents level a myriad of charges;
some fear another layer of government will take away property rights and
personal freedom.
Founded in Santa Clara County in 1972, the open space district can buy and manage land for open space, agriculture, natural resources, and low-intensity recreation. In 30 years, it has preserved almost 50,000 acres in 23 preserves in the Baylands, foothills, and mountains of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, from Los Gatos to San Carlos.
If the expansion is approved, the district plans to purchase and manage some 12,000 acres of coastal land in the next 15 years. Purchase would be from willing sellers only. The district says it would levy no new taxes, and it would adjust the boundaries of its seven wards so that residents of the Coastside could vote for its directors.
To help sort fact from fiction and clarify issues,
the Almanac has prepared
a summary of charges leveled during the hearings and responses to them.
Material comes from testimony at hearings, interviews, and documents.
Charge: The expansion is not necessary. The district can already buy and manage land outside its boundaries.
Response: Without expanding, the district can annex land only if
it is adjacent to its present boundaries near Skyline. Any land it buys
that cannot be annexed is subject to taxes. To manage land that is not
contiguous, the district must go through LAFCo for each parcel. The purpose
of the expansion is to look at the entire area, and not do things piecemeal.
The charge of LAFCo is to define ultimate boundaries or sphere of influence.
Charge: Another government agency will cause
loss of personal freedom and is a threat to property rights.
Response: The Mid-Pen expansion would have no effect on property
rights and personal freedom. The open space district is not a governing
body; it only administers land it owns or leases. Zoning and use of private
property on the Coastside are controlled by San Mateo County, not Mid-Pen.
The Coastal Commission also has some authority in coastal areas.
Claim: There are two dozen or more government agencies
with some activity on the Coastside. Present zoning and other restrictions
are sufficient; we don't need another agency.
Response: No other government
agency on coast has the sole function of buying and managing land for
open space. Mid-Pen will control only land it owns or leases. The district
will buy land only from people who want to sell; it has given up the right
of eminent domain, that is, the right to take private property and pay
for it. A bill, AB 1195, to remove the district's the right of eminent
domain from the coastal expansion area has passed both houses of the state
Legislature, and is on its way to the governor.
Claim: People should be able to vote on their
future. "We have a right to control our own destiny."
Response: Many zoning, land use, and other decisions are made by
local, state and federal government without an election. Coastside residents
would be able to vote for members of the district board. The legal process
LAFCo is going through now allows the possibility of a vote on the proposed
expansion in the affected area. If LAFCo approves the expansion, it holds
a further "protest hearing." If between 25 and 50 percent of the voters,
or owners of between 25 and 50 percent of the land, file a written protest,
the expansion will go to a vote. If the protest numbers are less than
25 percent, there is no vote, and the expansion occurs. If the protest
is more than 50 percent of either voters or land area, the expansion is
defeated.
Charge: Annexation will cause a tax burden. Schools
and services will suffer loss of income from taking lands off the tax
rolls.
Response: Annexation will not affect individual taxes. The district
has reached an agreement with the La Honda-Pescadero Unified School District
to reimburse it for lost taxes, and to provide environmental education
programs. The open space district has also reached an agreement with the
County Fire Department to make up for any tax loss, to provide a water
truck, and to cooperate on fire prevention and suppression. Fiscal impacts
on other services are non-existent or minor.
Claim: Crowds and traffic will overwhelm
roads and facilities. There are no visitor-serving facilities, such as
restrooms and parking lots. Response: Crowds and traffic are not coming
primarily to the open space preserves and farms. They are coming to the
beaches and state and county parks, which have facilities. Some facilities
may be built. Claim: The district is a bad neighbor. Preserve visitors
trespass on neighboring private land.
Response: The district attempts
to work with neighbors and has adopted a "Good Neighbor Policy." The district
admits some problems with neighbors, but claims it has good relations
with most of the thousand or more neighbors of its preserves. Rangers
attend to many problems and call the sheriff when necessary.
Claim: The district doesn't take care of the
land it now owns. It has eliminated grazing on some lands and allowed
invasive weeds to build up.
Response: The district spends about $3 million a year -- 25 percent
of its operating budget -- on resource management, including eliminating
invasive weeds and reducing fire danger. It has grazing leases on some
lands, but got no takers for Russian Ridge.
Claim: Two controlled burns on Russian Ridge
got out of hand.
Response: Of three controlled burns conducted by the California
Division of Forestry (not the district) on Russian Ridge, one "leaked"
out of the prescribed area and burned an additional 12 acres.
Claim: With all the controls, there's no threat
of development in the proposed annexation area.
Response: For-sale signs, large tracts of unused land, and uneconomic
farms suggest there is a long-term threat of cumulative development that
could transform the coast over a period of years. The pressures are unremitting.
The development threat is not so much wall-to-wall subdivisions as large
houses and estates that squeeze out farming. The district could give another
option to people wanting to sell land or easements, and help keep land
open and rural into the future.
Claim: Private land is well-protected by
farmers, ranchers and owners. There's no need for another agency.
Response: Yes, but many of the farming families are getting older,
and their children do not always want to farm. With the new global market,
it is getting harder to make farming pay. Mid-Pen could buy land or agricultural
easements from people who want to keep their land in production.
Claim: Land is being bought by public agencies
and land trusts such as the Peninsula
Open Space Trust (POST), and taken out of agriculture.
Response: Mid-Pen is not POST. Issues involving POST do not apply
to Mid-Pen. Mid-Pen has signed an agreement with the Farm Bureau to work
jointly to promote agriculture, plan individual farming projects, and
protect the unique landscape of the coast. The Farm Bureau board voted
13-0 to support the expansion. New alternatives such as this are essential
to stem the tide of urban sprawl.
Claim: Pescadero is dying; this will make things
worse.
Response: There is economic hope in tapping into the huge market over the hill. Some farmers, the Half Moon Bay Chamber of Commerce, and environmentalists suggest that a local kind of eco-tourism could attract people and help revive the economy. Many farmers sell their freshest produce to local restaurants and farmers' markets, and some welcome the public to "U-pick" fields of berries and kiwis. Mid-Pen could play a key part in supporting these farmers.
Page last updated
April 5, 2004
.
|