Naples - Take Action
Write Supervisors to Rescind Prior Closed Door Action Splitting Naples Project
To Do: Write, call or email members of the Board of Supervisors
Why: Promote Open Government Decisionmaking
When: Before Tuesday 1/27/09
What: Closed Session, Board of Supervisors Hearing, January 27, 2009
Background:
On October 7, 2008, the Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to adopt a revision to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Naples project. The MOU revision allowed the developer to process and ultimately build the inland portion of the Santa Barbara Ranch project before the Coastal Commission took final action on the County's approval. Although the original 2002 MOU was adopted in open session, the Board revised it in closed session.
The Naples Coalition, Surfrider Foundation and EDC objected to the action, and have demanded the Board rescind the closed session action by February 4, 2009. The Board will have to take action by February 3, 2009.
Sample message:
I am very concerned that our government operate openly and with transparency. The Board must rescind the October 7 closed session approval of the Naples MOU revision. The public's business, including this land use decision, should be conducted in open session, with a Staff Report and after hearing from the public. The Naples MOU was adopted in open session, so any revisions should be considered in open session. Bring government into the open for all to see!!
Email addresses of the members of the Board of Supervisors:
SupervisorCarbajal@sbcbos1.org
jcenteno@co.santa-barbara.ca.us
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Although the Supervisors approved the Project, the fight goes on. Please stay posted and we'll keep you advised.
Supporters can help by writing letters to the editor in all news outlets and blogs decrying the failure of County leadership to save Naples. Naples supporters should make sure that candidates for the 3rd District pledge to make Naples a high priority in their term, and commit to work for a solution acceptable to the community
Please see the Naples Calendar section for a list of important upcoming hearings. And the Naples main page for updated information and to learn more about how to get involoved in these hearings.
For more detailed information about issues, please visit the Naples Issues and Talking Points page.
Sign up to receive focused action alerts and talking points.
Click here for background information about the Naples project or visit www.SaveNaples.org
Project documents, including the EIR and staff reports, are available at http://sbcountyplanning.org/projects/03DVP-00041/index.cfm
Naples Calition President's response to Santa Maria Times article on Naples:
The Naples Coalition has worked for years to promote an alternative approach to the Naples development that preserves the rural character of the Gaviota Coast, better protects the coastal resources and public access at Naples, and meets the developer's bottom line. We developed an alternative development configuration that avoided development of the bluff lots, and encouraged the County to adopt a robust transfer of development rights (TDR) program to pay the developer to retire Naples development. County staff has deferred to the developer's wishes throughout the process, and when the developer vetoed our alternative and insisted on a weak, wholly voluntary TDR program, county staff quickly embraced the developer's views.
The Board of Supervisors had an opportunity to show some leadership and ingenuity in working to find that better solution, but instead lined up behind the developer. Supervisor Firestone clearly missed the boat on what the community was asking for at Naples, and didn't even try to understand either project details or the community's proposals. He asked not a single question through the 10 hours of public hearings.
Supervisor Gray suffered from a similar lack of initiative, accusing opponents from being "disconnected" from the Board's options. Since she only heard from the developer, she know only his choice - all or nothing.
The Supervisors materially prejudiced the County's role in protecting Naples when they approved a 20 year development agreement, tying the County's hands and insulating the developer from any form of changed conditions or additional requirements. The Supervisors decided in closed session to release the developer from obligations to process the project as a package, leading to disjointed, piecemealed development and allowing the developer to evade mitigations and promised public benefits, including agricultural conservation easements and public trails. The Supervisors sided with the developer in an effort to strong-arm the Coastal Commission into approving Osgood's project, materially jeopardizing the County's jurisdiction and threatening Naples with 50 inland lots on prime agricultural lands plus 67 grid lots on the bluff, plus no end to the developer's lawsuits.
It is evident that the Supervisors were either fundamentally ignorant of the consequences of their actions, or simply sought to aid and abet the developer in bringing an Orange County-style subdivision to the Gaviota Coast. In either case, the actions of the three Supervisors that voted for the Naples development was an unprecedented giveaway of our precious Gaviota Coast that should be condemned.
Phil McKenna
President
Naples Coalition