General Plan at the Frog Jump - May 2010
As you may know, two of our leading volunteers, who helped create Alternative D, are Mike and Tonja Dausend. They didn't stop there. Below is a picture of them helping to protect your property rights from unreasonable government regulations at their display at the recent Frog Jump Fair.
Here is the property rights poster they displayed at the fair.
CCTA Comments on Housing Element 11-03-09
These comments refer to the Preliminary Public Draft Policy Document – September 1, 2009.
We recommend that the proposed document be revised to ensure protection of the liberties and property rights of the citizens of Calaveras County. There is too much effort to control the housing market, which tends to suppress this industry and therefore make housing less affordable.
In addition, there is an implied obligation created which suggests that it is the government’s responsibility for the provision of housing. This concept is spread worldwide, but our Constitution protects the citizen’s rights of life, liberty and property in this country.
Although this apparent ideological factor implying government’s responsibility is inherent in the CEQA legislation, it is important that the government intrusions into the housing market be reduced by thoughtful liberating revisions to this element of the general plan. We think this approach should be extended to all the other elements of the general plan as well.
We suggest a new direction which would advance zoning liberation policies to allow the property owner maximum freedom in land development choices, subject to the rights of the neighbors and the public. In this regard, there are some positive policy statements in the document that could be helpful such as:
H-1.1 “The County shall ensure that its adopted policies, regulations, and procedures do not add unnecessarily to the time required for development or cost of construction of new housing ….” Unfortunately, the words that follow tend to nullify that statement: “ …. While still attaining other important [unspecified] County objectives, such as public health and safety.”
H-1.3 “The County shall amend land use regulation, development standards, permitting procedures, and fees where feasible to remove unnecessary impediments to and reduce the cost of residential development.” In this case, remove the words “where feasible” because “unnecessary” is the appropriate qualifier.
H-1.7 “Encourage Second-Floor Housing Units” This is good, but a no brainer if all zoning is made more flexible to accommodate human needs as determined by the free market.
We believe the worst and most potentially destructive Program is H-2.7 “Inclusionary Housing Study.” This is actually a government price-fixing scheme whereby developers would be required of offer some of their units at below market prices. The selected low income buyers of these properties would have restrictions imposed by government and would have no equity in their homes for extended periods of time.
It should be recognized that the General Plan consultants have an ideological perspective as a part of an extensive movement to affect societal change towards higher government involvement in society via the land use process. Therefore, it is important that the County obtain the services of a consultant with expertise in the US Constitution, who could advise or make suggestions for revisions that would protect our property rights and our local market economy.
CCTA Comments on General Plan Update
September 9, 2008
Subject: General Plan Update
Dear Calaveras County Board of Supervisors:
The Calaveras County Taxpayers Association directors have reviewed Mintner and Associates Draft Working Vision Statement and Guiding Principles and General Plan Public Review Draft Issues and Opportunities Report in detail.
CCTA questions, comments and recommendations are included in the attached three pages. Our concerns are that, as presented, the updated General Plan will unfairly restrict reasonable and constitutional use of private property by owners, will be difficult to administer and will impede economic development.
We respectfully request that the County Supervisors and staff carefully consider the attached documents and re-direct Mintner and Associates accordingly.
Sincerely,
Albert J. Segalla, President
Attached:
Review of Vision Statement
Review of Key Policy Questions
Summary
REVIEW OF VISION STATEMENT AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
CCTA believes that the submitted General Plan Update proposals are excessive, overreaching and in some respects unconstitutional. The GPU scope should be reduced to address only land use matters with the sole objective of meeting the CEQA and other state statutes' extensive requirements without infringing upon citizens' constitutional right to reasonably use their property. For example, the draft addresses government fees, funding and promotion of small business, education, and tourism, none of which directly relate to land use.
On first glance, the document appears to be a statement of lofty goals and noble purpose. But what does it really mean? Since we are concerned about the expansion of government control and potential for abuse of property rights, we pose these ten questions:
1. Are the “Guiding Principles” really principles or subtle and deliberate obfuscations? The first guiding principle should be, “the GPU update shall adhere to and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America”.
2. Does the protection of “open space, wildlife habitat, scenic vistas, agricultural lands, forests, rivers and lakes” mean that the owners of those assets will no longer have control of their property? Are ranchers and landowners obligated to provide and preserve scenic vistas, public recreation, et al, without compensation?
3. Does having building boundaries limiting construction to existing communities mean that no lots large enough to keep a horse or llama will be allowed? Is this smart growth?
4. Regarding Senate Bill 32, Global Warming Solutions Act: A substantial number of scientists are questioning the validity of the carbon theory, which this law is based on. What if property rights are compromised in the name of catastrophic global warming and then the theory is discredited?
5. How can land use restrictions promote tourism? Is it even worth the attempt?
6. Are developers not now limited to availability of infrastructure or is the General Plan meant to be a no-growth plan?
7. What is the need for riparian controls in the general plan? Are water rights and riparian protection not adequately addressed by other jurisdictions and existing statutes?
8. How will the GP resolve the issues of fire protection and logging? Are logging regulations and wildfire protection not the province of the state?
9. How are education and health care deemed land use issues? Why are they included in the list?
10. Why is government service included in the list? How does it relate to land use decisions?
REVIEW OF KEY POLICY QUESTIONS
• What is the appropriate minimum parcel size in rural areas that will discourage sprawl and protect open space and working landscapes?
CCTA: Minimum parcel size should be determined by reasonable use of the land, not for imprecise and questionable political ends.
• How can Calaveras County support infill development that offers a small-town, rural atmosphere and lifestyle in existing community centers?
CCTA: Infill may destroy the desirability of existing neighborhoods by increasing crowding, traffic congestion and parking shortages. It also threatens historic features of the gold rush communities. Infill should not be a priority in Calaveras County.
• How can the County protect and preserve historic centers?
CCTA: Private interests preserve historic buildings and sites as a matter of economic self interest. County planning is not needed to preserve history.
• How can the GP provide sufficient local control over planning decisions?
CCTA: The General plan should be written as a performance document that clearly and succinctly specifies the minimum requirements for building or development and leaves the specific details to owners or developers, thus minimizing need for control.
• How should County retain distinct community identities while stimulating growth and reinvestment in the communities?
CCTA: First, “community identity” is an imprecise and subjective term. Laws, ordinances and regulations must have clear, well defined objectives to be generally understood and fairly enforced. Secondly, relaxed regulation will best stimulate growth and investment.
• How should the County best provide unique community gathering places and recreation areas?
CCTA: It should encourage communities, non-profit organizations, developers and entrepreneurs to provide parks, playgrounds, open areas and meeting halls.
• How can the County work with farmers, ranchers, non-profit organizations and other partners to preserve agricultural land?
CCTA: The County can continue to encourage agricultural enterprises such as hunting clubs, riding academies, ranch hostels, etc.
• Should the County consider a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program to protect open space?
CCTA: As long as land is more valuable in agriculture, it will not be developed. Development should be based on economics, not politics. Also, a TDR program would be wasteful, tempt abuse and fraud and would diminish property rights.
SUMMARY
CCTA believes that the submitted General Plan Update proposals are excessive and overreaching and should be reduced to address only land use matters with the sole objective of meeting the CEQA and other state statutes’ extensive requirements. For example, the draft addresses government fees, funding and promotion of small business, education, and tourism, none of which directly relate to land use.
Furthermore, we believe the new general plan and ensuing zoning ordinance should be simple, more concise and user friendly. It should be written in plain English using only common words with precise meaning and should adhere to the US and California constitutions.
_________________________________________________________
CCTA – Study Group
Draft Comments & Suggestions
August 4, 2005
Our comments in blue italics. This was presented to the Board of Supervisors on 8-5-08. We welcome your comments!
DRAFT WORKING VISION STATEMENT AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The historical character of the county's communities, the value of its productive resources, and the distinction of its physical beauty will continue to create a high quality of life for residents and a remarkable and memorable experience for visitors to the county.
Guiding Principles
• The history of the Gold Rush era will be alive in the culture of distinctive communities that provide a high quality of life for generations of residents.
With the oppressive high quantity of government, the opposite would be more likely, as shortages and unemployment would tend to increase due to the high level of regulation. High quality of life relates more to people than buildings or history.
• Open space, wildlife habitat, scenic vistas, agricultural lands, forests, rivers, and lakes will be protected and maintained for wildlife habitat, productive grazing and agricultural lands, and recreation.
This involves transfer of control of private land to the public sector and is open to abuse.
• Communities will have clear boundaries and be separated from one another by working landscapes, greenbelts, or parks.
If this imposed separation prevented a productive use of a property, all would suffer.
• Communities will have distinct centers where shopping, medical services, childcare, schools, jobs, and infrastructure are available, They will provide a range of housing types and affordability so people of all income levels can live in the same community.
We have this now; however the location of all facilities must be under the control of the owners of those facilities otherwise we could lose needed facilities. Downtown Arnold is suffering from over regulation.
• Businesses will thrive in a strong local economy based on sustainable natural resources and innovative industries. New opportunities for economic development will capitalize on advanced technology and catalyze growth and innovation.
Business best thrives in an environment of freedom where the business owner is free to make his own decisions with minimum government regulation.
• Visitors from around the state will be attracted to Calaveras County's historic
communities, local businesses, recreation areas, and wineries. Tourism will play major role in the local economy and protection of natural and scenic resources.
Historic buildings will remain at the desire of their owners because their economic values are enhanced by their historic value. The necessity of statutory regulation to protect supposed "historic" buildings demonstrates that the supposed historic value may not exist, otherwise it would be economically utilized by its owners
• Development will not outpace the ability of County government to provide adequate services and infrastructure or reduce the level of service provided to existing communities.
Government services should not be used as a tool to restrict growth. The level of government services needs to keep pace with development.
• Highways and streets will be well-maintained and well-connected. Public transit, bike and pedestrian facilities will provide choices for travel within communities and to major destinations.
This should occur as people desire and as feasible.
• Water quality and water rights will be protected to ensure that they are sustained for future generations.
Water quality is protected now and protection and creation of future water supply has been overlooked.
• The risks of flooding, fire hazards, and climate change will be mitigated to the greatest extent possible to protect residents.
Government restrictions on logging and mismanagement of our forests have, and are, creating increased fire danger. According to now over 31,000 scientists, the global warming scare is based on junk science and is very dangerous to people everywhere.
• Residents will have access to medical and emergency services, and opportunities for life-long learning and enrichment at educational institutions.
Government over regulation of our health care industry has greatly increased the costs and reduced the level of care. Medical, emergency and educational goods and services must be paid for by the recipient of those goods and services, not paid for at the expense of others.
• Government services will be efficient and effective with measurable results. Through community involvement and volunteerism, residents will be active participants in guiding Calaveras County towards a common vision for the future.
Community involvement is good, however communism has never worked. We must prevent individual rights suffering by will of the group. This is the primary purpose of the US constitution. We need to recognize this constitution in our public planning process.
The Vision Statement and Guiding Principles are based on input from community groups, community workshops, Board of Supervisors, and County staff. The document will be refined following the selection of the preferred alternative in Phase 4, and ultimately placed in the preface of the General Plan Policy Document.
June 25, 2008