Issuing a stinging rebuke to common sense and a deep bow to
gutless political pandering, Santa Clara County supervisors decided
Tuesday not to proceed with an analysis and study of the
draconically restrictive land-use initiative voters will be faced
with in November.
Issuing a stinging rebuke to common sense and a deep bow to gutless political pandering, Santa Clara County supervisors decided Tuesday not to proceed with an analysis and study of the draconically restrictive land-use initiative voters will be faced with in November.
Only Supervisors Don Gage and Pete McHugh stood up to the specious arguments put forth by the initiatives backers that an independent study could somehow prejudice the initiative process. Supervisors Blanca Alvarado, Liz Kniss and Jim Beall should want every piece of good information before them and available to the public. Instead, they washed their collective hands and declared themselves innocent bystanders. That’s not what leaders do.
Said Supervisor Alvarado: “The board of supervisors did not propose this initiative. It was brought to us by groups who have spent a considerable amount of time soliciting signatures. At this point, it is out of our hands. Our obligation is to certify the signatures and place the initiative on the ballot.”
Wrong. As our elected leaders, it is their obligation to become objectively and thoroughly informed and, in turn, help the public understand the issues. An independent analysis would have done exactly that.
But ordering a study became a political risk because the answers to the many questions raised by the sugar-is-sweet titled “Initiative for the Conservation and Preservation of Hillsides, Ranchlands and Agricultural Lands” may not have pleased the environmentalists – or in this case those who would be better classified as private property thieves.
Fortunately, at least one objective analysis has been done. Seasoned and well-respected county planning staff member Bill Shoe prepared a detailed 17-page report for the board.
What’s clear from that is that the initiative is not only poorly crafted, it’s a nightmare.
The report concluded:
– “The possible continuing need for the interpretation and the Initiative for each action or permit related to land use and development could subject the County to an almost continuing threat of litigation from anyone disputing such interpretations or the permit application outcomes.”
– “… the initiative imposes affirmative enforcement obligations on the County, which could be costly and staff-intensive to implement. Reallocation of staff and resources could be required.”
It pointed out:
– “… it could make many camps, retreats, and other uses with overnight visitor accommodations non-conforming, including CordeValle’s 45 units of overnight accommodations.”
– “… a 10-acre maximum size limit would be imposed on cemeteries, with no limit presently.”
Those are just a few of the many ridiculous outcomes directed by this proposal.
Besides devastating private property rights and guaranteeing work for lawyers into the next century, the initiative would devalue thousands of acres of land leading to a significant reduction in property tax collections.
Yet, in a vivid display of exactly the type of leadership this county does not need, three supervisors voted against calling for an independent analytical study of the initiative. Way to throw in the towel.
