AB
2860
I was reading the California Counties Legislative Bulletin
the other day.
Boy, are those folks busy in Sacramento making all sorts
of new laws for us to follow! I came across legislation proposed by Assembly
Member Tony Mendoza on Feb. 22 that was set for a hearing on April 16 but was
postponed; no future hearing has been set at this time. This bill would specify
that a Williamson Act contract is deemed null and void when the land subject to
the contract is acquired by the federal government to hold in trust on behalf
of a federally recognized Indian tribe.
If you’ll recall, for those of you who do not have
Williamson Act contracts, the whole purpose of the contract between the
landowner and the county is to guarantee that the land will be kept in
agriculture for a rolling ten year period in exchange for a reduction in
property taxes. It has been a great incentive to a great many landowners to
keep their land producing agricultural products instead of selling it to
developers for housing or other more intensive uses.
The county is reimbursed by the state for the loss in tax
money by means of what is called the subvention fund. You may remember that not
too long ago our governor was trying to get rid of the subvention fund which,
in turn, would have eliminated the Williamson Act, as the counties cannot
afford the reduction in tax money.
Now Mr. Mendoza wants to bankrupt the counties that have
aggressive casino groups buying up everything for sale, much of which, at least
in this county, is agricultural and under the Williamson Act. So who is this to
benefit?
Since sovereign nations apparently do not have to follow
any of the rules that the rest of us do with regard to land use, whether or not
a Williamson Act contract exists doesn’t seem to have much relevance. What is
the county to do to recoup the tax money now lost that ordinarily would have
been repaid upon notice of nonrenewal by the landowner? And what is really the
worst result of this ugly legislation is the permanent loss of agricultural
land that our society will never get back. Is it really so important to ruin
the land that has fed you for generations?
Is
it AG?
Planners in Santa Barbara County have struggled for many
years to define the topics they were discussing, often having to rely on people
who admittedly didn’t know much about it. Such has been the case with the
numerous fields which come under the heading of agriculture, ranging from the
greenhouses in Carpinteria to the open fields of
Santa Maria.
Almost everyone agrees that agriculture is a very
important industry in this county, as it brings in a majority of the income on
which the county relies to pay for the services that property tax does not. It
is, however, not the easiest to define, as it has expanded and changed in
material ways over the years.
In the fifty-some years I have been in this valley, I have
seen incredible changes occur which not only have different requirements and
are serviced by different types of businesses, but which also have changed the
entire look of the landscape. There are still the large pastures covering the
rolling hills in the forefront, the oak covered mountains between us and Santa
Barbara, but increasingly there are vistas of rows of vegetables or grapevines.
Very few acres remain that produce alfalfa, oats or other
grain crops for livestock. As a result, one has to go to the Central Valley to
find twine (no more wire) to bale one’s hay. Very few cattle trucks pass
through the valley, and then only stopping at the last remaining ranches
running cattle these days.
Instead one finds, particularly in the fall months, large
tractor-trailers full of bins, empty on their way to the vineyard and full on
their way to processing locations. During the summer, these same types of
trucks wend their way to the vegetable fields to pick up their bell peppers or
tomatoes.
So, the kinds of agriculture have changed, but there also
is a more ominous change occurring that I would like to bring to your
attention.
A wine processing facility is being proposed for ag land that, during the most
recent overhaul of the ag rules, was made possible.
Is this ag? Would a meat
processing plant on a ranch also qualify as ag? What is the difference? How does a sanitation
dump qualify as agriculture? Is a race track, a show arena or a vegetable
cooler agriculture? What about a motel with three rows of grapevines in the
front yard? How about a house, one in which nobody lives, on the same property
where some grapevines are located? Is that agriculture?
On May 26, the planning commission will consider Brooks
Firestone’s application to make legal a barn, a large bathroom facility and
other structures on the “Crossroads” property. The numerous public events that
have been held there for years, one of which even I attended, apparently are
not legal either, so Firestone is requesting that they be made legal as well.
Part of the application includes an expansion of the events to 32 a year — that
is eight per month: 30 of them for up to 250 people per event, and 2 per year for
1,500 people apiece.
I am, frankly, shocked. First of all, these public events
have been going on for years, all of them in violation of county regulations.
And Brooks Firestone is our supervisor! Do these rules not apply to him as well
as to the rest of us? I couldn’t believe that even the buildings have been
illegal the whole time he was in office. For all the lip service given to the
value of agriculture, he was unable to help me keep current my application for
an arena cover, nor, apparently, to make his own property
comply with county regulations.
And how can you possibly call this agriculture? Part of
the application is to rezone the property to AG-1-40, which will enable him to
use the house at a later date for a bed and breakfast — although I can’t
imagine why anybody would want to stay somewhere that hundreds of people will
gather every weekend, all weekend. If this is the new face of ag I don’t want any part of it. I
know it deserves some kind of classification, but ag certainly isn’t it. What do you think?
Absentee
I guess I’ll be absentee for a
while, as I am going to England for a couple of weeks to attend the Chelsea
Flower Show. I have heard so much about it over the years and I am inspired by
the extremely beautiful valley gardens that I have been fortunate to visit, so
I decided to go. My husband and I will be visiting with his brother and
sister-in-law, who live in the medieval town of Lichfield.
Before I leave, I must send in my absentee ballot so that
I may register my choice for our next supervisor. I have to say that the choice
this time was not a difficult one, as there really seem such major differences
between the candidates. First there is the representative of the block of folks
who live mostly over the hill who have controlled 3rd District politics for
thirty years — and who got us nowhere positive with a whole lot more useless
rules to follow. Since that candidate is trying to keep quiet having served on
another district’s planning commission, I will not vote for that puppet. Two of
the candidates are not really serious, as both of them possess ranges of
experience that do not begin to cover the entire district.
In fact, if you could combine the two you might create a more well-rounded individual. So, those two will not receive
my vote either.
As for the hand-picked successor, it is a little hard to
imagine having a supervisor who lives in another state. To suggest that this
person, who has never finished a term of anything that I have been able to
find, is electable is ludicrous.
What do we do when that person decides, for whatever
reason, to leave to do something else? Why would we think that this person
would suddenly change behavior?
And finally, you are hearing a lot of ads about how
important agriculture is to that person, particularly from people wearing
cowboy hats who have never worn them before, probably can’t ride and certainly
don’t know the first thing about ag, and whose
supporters support themselves, not ag — but you can
make up your own mind.
I certainly have and look forward to
being truly represented by someone who listens, who cares about our future and
who wants to change how county government works so that it works for us, not
against us.