COMPLETED BOARD ORDER"�|E�M�S-2
Before the Board of Supervisors in and for the
County of Monterey, State of California
Board of Supervisors consider to broaden
and/or clarify the circumstances for appeals
to include non-profit organizations
representing the public interest and direct
staff to make no changes to the current
County Fee Waiver Policy August 2000).
Fee Waiver Policy/REF 100045)
Upon motion of Supervisor Potter seconded by Supervisor Armenta, and carried by those
members present, the Board of Supervisors hereby:
Direct staff to make no changes to the current County Fee Waiver Policy August
2000).
CONTINUTED TO A DATE UNCERTAIN this 11th day of January 2011, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Supervisors Armenta, Calcagno, Salinas, Parker, Potter
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
I, Gail T. Borkowski, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey, State of California,
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of an original order of said Board of Supervisors duly made
and entered in the minutes thereof of Minute Book 75 for the meeting on January 11, 2011.
Dated: January 21, 2011 Gail T. Borkowski, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Monterey, State of California
Deputy
BIB]
40572-U01
COMPLETED-U02
BOARD-U02
ORDER-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98130-U03
C15-U03
COMPLETED-U03
BOARD-U03
ORDER-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 6
ILII
From: Mitchell Jan janmitcheII777@hughes.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 1:57 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: January 11, 2011 Fee Waivers for Non-Profit Groups"
January 4, 2011
Chair and Honorable Supervisors
MONTEREY COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD
P. O. Box 1728
Salinas, California 93902
Board Discussion January 11, 2011
Subject: Fee Waivers for Non-Profit Groups
Chair and Supervisors;
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1 CAo
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
Please be advised that the PRUNEDALE NEIGHBORS GROUP PNG), and the
PRUNEDALE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE PPA) both non-profit non-incorporated
community groups with membership throughout north county District 2)
neighborhoods, would like to go on record in support of fee waivers for non-profits".
We wish to thank Supervisor Jane Parker for initiating this suggestion.
Furthermore, we feel that it is important to make certain that non-incorporated" public
interest groups such as ours) are included in the definition of non-profits".
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 2 of 6
Otherwise, any community group which has not completed the arduous" and most
expensive" process of incorporation might well be excluded. This determination could
only be considered as fair", in keeping with our country's democratic process.
Thank you for including our comments in the public record.
Happy trails,
Mrs.) Jan Mitchell,
Representative
PRUNEDALE NEIGHBORS GROUP PNG)
PRUNEDALE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE PPA)
70 Carlsen Road
Prunedale, Calif. 93907-1309
Phone: 831-663-3021
Fax: 831-663-5629
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 6
From: Mitchell Jan janmitchell777@hughes.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 1:57 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: January 11, 2011 Fee Waivers for Non-Profit Groups"
January 4, 2011
Chair and Honorable Supervisors
MONTEREY COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD
P. O. Box 1728
Salinas, California 93902
Board Discussion January 11, 2011
Subject: Fee Waivers for Non-Profit Groups
Chair and Supervisors;
Please be advised that the PRUNEDALE NEIGHBORS GROUP PNG), and the
PRUNEDALE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE PPA) both non-profit non-incorporated
community groups with membership throughout north county District 2)
neighborhoods, would like to go on record in support of fee waivers for non-profits".
We wish to thank Supervisor Jane Parker for initiating this suggestion.
Furthermore, we feel that it is important to make certain that non-incorporated" public
interest groups such as ours) are included in the definition of non-profits".
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 2 of 6
Otherwise, any community group which has not completed the arduous" and most
expensive" process of incorporation might well be excluded. This determination could
only be considered as fair", in keeping with our country's democratic process.
Thank you for including our comments in the public record.
Happy trails,
Mrs.) Jan Mitchell,
Representative
PRUNEDALE NEIGHBORS GROUP PNG)
PRUNEDALE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE PPA)
70 Carlsen Road
Prunedale, Calif. 93907-1309
Phone: 831-663-3021
Fax: 831-663-5629
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 2
From: C Kost carolynkost@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 2:56 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Process and South County
To all in decision-making positions in Monterey County:
Received by C/em to
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date Of. Item No:
Dist i
Dist 2
Dist 3
Dist 4,
Dist 5
CAO,
County Counsel
We reside in South County and in Pacific Grove and are consistently astonished at the preferential and
deferential treatment of citizens on the Peninsula and the absolute invisibility of residents of other parts of the
County to those in power. Please listen to the concerns of voices of local people in developments that threaten
Monterey County's most pristine area.
What has happened to citizen participation? Decisions are being made without any input from us that affect our
lives, our property, and the future of our region in the matter of the dramatic expansion of oil and gas extraction in
Monterey County.
Charging non-profit citizens groups to take part in the discussion being held behind closed doors is a misuse of
authority. We should not be at the mercy of outside interests making decisions that affect us without informing us,
and about which we have little or no say.
As residents of Southern Monterey County, we ask those of you who have been elected or appointed to
safeguard the public trust to re-examine your policies as reflected in the carte blanche you seem to be giving oil
giants to use controversial, untested techniques such as chemical fracking to extract minerals from beneath the
earth on which we have built our homes. We ask that you re-examine your policies regarding citizen input to your
policy making.
Fracking in other areas has resulted in public health disasters, for which the company and the County could be
legally at fault, since the County has, in fact, been warned.This process has the potential to render our wells dry
and contaminated in an agricultural and recreational area. It could put an end to San Bernabe, the world's third
largest vineyard, and other vineyards in South County and could contaminate Lakes Nacimiento and San Antonio
and preclude fishing. All of this represents an inordinately severe blow to natural resources, the quality of life
in Monterey and SLO County, in addition to a loss of revenue.
When this sort of thing has already happened in other areas of the country, it is unconscionable that you, the
empowered, do not exercise better judgement in the stewardship of that which is entrusted to you. I leave to your
conscience to consider the ancient proverb, God will not seek thy race, nor thy birth; Alone will God demand of
thee What hast thou done with the land I gave thee?"
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 2 of 2
How will you answer?
Sincerely,
Carolyn Kost, Ph.D./ABD
When virtue is lost, benevolence appears, when benevolence is lost right conduct appears, when
right conduct is lost, expedience appears. Expediency is the mere shadow of right and truth; it is
the beginning of disorder."
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�To,
Jane Parker
Chair, Monterey County Board of Supervisors
168 Alisal Street, Salinas, CA 93901
Re: Appeal Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations and
Disadvantaged Communities
Dear Chair Parker and Supervisors Salinas, Calcagno, Armenta and Potter,
The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water EJCW) supports the modification to Monterey
County's Fee Waiver Program to eliminate fees charged to non-profit, public benefit
organizations when filing appeals to the Planning Commission and/ or to the Board of
Supervisors.
The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water EJCW) is a statewide coalition of more than 80
community-based and non-profit organizations and Tribes working to achieve water justice in
California. Water justice is the ability of all communities to access safe, affordable water
resources for all cultural and beneficial uses. We have been working in the Monterey County
area for the past six years, mostly with disadvantaged communities struggling to gain access to
water for basic human needs like drinking, bathing, and cooking. We have worked closely with
several low-income Latino communities in the area to help address critical water justice issues.
We also participate in regional policy efforts to ensure local communities have their water-
related needs represented, such as the Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Process
and Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board policy development.
As you are aware, water is a critical resource on the Central Coast, including in Monterey
County. Hence, planning decisions taken in the County must be responsive to water needs,
especially of poor communities, and these communities must be given the ability to fully
participate in such decisions. However, Monterey County's current fees for appeals of such
planning decisions are one of the highest appeal fees of any county in the state almost $5000
per appeal. In many instances, when an initial decision is made at the Zoning Administrator
level, two appeals are necessary to finally reach the Board of Supervisors and meet the legal
threshold of exhausting all administrative remedies, adding up to $10,000. This prohibitive cost
places a heavy burden on public interest appeals and suppresses participation by community
members and by public interest and community groups who often represent such communities.
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�We are also concerned that there is an inconsistency in the assessment of appeal fees, as
Monterey County's Coastal Zone is exempted, however the inland zone is not exempted. As you
are well aware, Monterey County's most disadvantaged and vulnerable populations live not
along the coast, but rather inland in places such as the Salinas Valley. Hence, this inconsistency
places more vulnerable communities at a disadvantage to participate in planning decisions that
affect their lives. In the case of appeals brought by public benefit organizations or disadvantaged
communities, this inconsistency should be eliminated.
EJCW also supports the proposed differentiation between non-profit organizations that act in the
public interest versus non-profits which function as political and economic advocates. Only
appeals in the public interest should receive this exemption. This is an important distinction,
especially in light of the fact that non-profits organized as economic and political advocates often
receive significant sums of public money annually. For example, the Monterey County Vintners
and Growers Association received more than $400,000 from federal sources in 2010 to promote
the economic interests of their industry in Monterey County. Such organizations whose budgets
are augmented by taxpayers, should not receive fee exemptions on appeals to further their
economic interests.
Finally, we feel strongly that the proposed fee exemption be extended for all public-interest
organizations regardless of whether they have undergone the time-consuming and costly process
of incorporation as tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations. The fee exemption should
apply to all community groups whose sole interest is the public interest, and also to poor
communities in Monterey County. For instance, the farmworker housing cooperative of San
Jerardo is not a non-profit organization by its structure, but it is a low-income disadvantaged
community and must also be considered in the definition of public-interest organizations.
Perhaps the language used by the Department of Water Resources DWR) to identify
disadvantaged communities could be used here; that the community's median household income
MHI) should be under 80% of the state's MHI.
Since the appeal process is complex and demanding, and since the proposed changes would only
apply to appeals brought by public interest organizations regarding important matters, the
proposed changes should not have any significant fiscal impact on the county. Hence, EJCW
strongly urges the board to adopt the proposed changes to Monterey County's Fee Waiver
Program.
Sincerely,
Dipti Bhatnagar
Northern California Program Director
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
1201 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, Oakland, CA 94612
Ph: 510 286 8402, 510 504 2876
E-mail: dipti@ejcw.org
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3�Page 1 of 1
From: SuRay rayfill@inreach.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:33 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Cc: Hold Onnow; rayfill@inreach.com
Subject: Fw: Fee Waiver for Citizen Groups and Non Profits
To all in decision-making positions in Monterey County:
We just watched a TV news analysis about the African country of Ivory Coast, where citizens are powerless to
influence their government's policies, and even their votes are ignored. My husband remarked, How can we do
anything about their problems, when we can't even fix our own, in this country, even in our own back yard!" He
refers to the lack of citizen participation in decisions being made by government entities that affect the quality of
our lives and the future of our region in the matter of the dramatic expansion of oil and gas extraction in Monterey
County.
Charging non-profit citizens groups addressing these issues exorbitant fees to take part in the discussion being
held behind closed doors is a misuse of authority that one hardly expects in the sophisticated democracy this
country boasts of having! What is going on in places like Monterey County suggests the total lack of safeguards
against powerful, outside interests making decisions that local citizens are barely informed of, and about which we
have little or no say.
As residents of Southern Monterey County, we ask those of you who have been elected or appointed to
safeguard the public trust to re-examine your policies as reflected in the carte blanche you seem to be giving oil
giants to use controversial, untested techniques such as chemical fracking to extract minerals from beneath the
earth on which we have built our homes. We ask that you re-examine your policies regarding citizen input to your
policy making.
We ask this not only in the name of our quality of life, but in light of the democratic principles on which this country
is built. What is going on? Is the rush to profit, to continue guaranteeing our reliance on energy sources that have
been proven to be a major cause of environmental degradation that threatens the future of our children and
grandchildren so great as to discount the voices of those who are calling for democratic decision-making? We're
saddened and frightened watching these developments, and intend to do all in our power as individuals to join
with others who feel the same sense of forboding about the direction in which local officials are allowing
commercial interests to take the entire county. What if these companies were applying to drill in Carmel Valley?
Would you be acting in the same manner toward citizen involvement?
Please listen to the voices of local people who have no financial stake in developments that threaten Monterey
County's most pristine area.
Sincerely,
Susan Raycraft and Larry Woodfill
Received by Cleric to the Boaid
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1
Dist 2
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
CAO.
County Counsel
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O
3�I- LII
From: Charles Rowley c.a.rowley@wildblue.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:44 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee Waiver for Public Benefit NGO's
5 a-
I am writing to make my clear statement of support regarding the adoption of a fee waiver for appeals
to the Board and to the Planning Commission for public benefit non-profits-- truly for all parties that
are advocating for the public benefit-- but certainly for public benefit NGO's. Thank you, kindly!
Charles Rowley, M.L.A.
48491 Sapaque Valley Road
Bradley, CA 93426
home: 805.472.2750
mobile: 415.816.5511
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1 CAO
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O
3�Page 1 of 1
From: Jeff Kuyper Jeff@LPFW.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 9:45 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee Waiver for Appeals
Dear Members of the Board:
I am writing on behalf of Los Padres ForestWatch to urge your adoption of a fee waiver or a
significantly reduced fee schedule) for nonprofit organizations and neighborhood associations from
the fees normally charged for appeals to the Planning Commission and to your Board.
As you know, the current fee for filing an appeal is $4,821.67. Our review of the fee schedules for
other counties in California indicate that Monterey County's fee is clearly unreasonable. In fact,
Monterey County's appeal fee is 241% higher than the second-highest appeal fee in California,
which is $2,000 set by the county of Ventura. Most counties' appeal fees hover around the $1,000
mark, with many well below that, and several counties have provisions in place to waive those fees
entirely or assess those fees to the project applicant) for appeals filed by nonprofit public-benefit
organizations or neighborhood associations.
A fee waiver for nonprofit appeals is particularly important for issues involving environmental
impacts. The County's exorbitant fees stifle the mandate set forth by the California Environmental
Quality Act to encourage public participation in the environmental review and decision making
process.
We understand that appeals take significant County staff time and resources to process. However,
appeals play a vital role in the democratic process and we feel that it is inappropriate to levy such
high fees on citizens and residents of the County who are merely trying to exercise their right to
participate in this process. While ForestWatch is not based in Monterey County, we have several
dozen members who reside there, as well as other partner organizations with whom we work
closely on issues relating to the Los Padres National Forest. On that basis, we urge your Board to
adopt a fee waiver or a significantly reduced fee schedule so that we and our partner organizations
can participate meaningfully in the County's decision making process.
Thank you for your consideration.
Cheers,
Jeff Kuyper, Executive Director
Los Padres ForestWatch
Post Office Box 831
Santa Barbara, CA 93102
805.617.4610 ext. 1
jeff@LPFW.org
ForestWatch is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization working
to protect and restore the natural and cultural heritage of
the Los Padres National Forest and other public lands along
California's Central Coast. Join us today at www.LPFW.org
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of: Item No:
Dist 1.
Dist 2.
Dist 3.
Dist 4.
Dist 5.
CAO.
County Counsel
1/5/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O
3�Page 1 of 5
From: Hold Onnow hold.holdonnow@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:13 AM
To: Undisclosed recipients
Subject: Issue of fee waiver for non-profits to be heard by the Board of Supervisors in Monterey on January
11
All:
Now that the holidays are over, everything is moving ahead with rip roar speed in the south Monterey
County black-gold rush.
The Board is supposed to hear the issue of a fee waiver for public benefit non-profits on January 11th
and it will be very helpful particularly if Sierra Club, VWA, Land Watch, and Pelican Network, as well
as local individuals residing in the County or adjacent counties, could weigh in on the need to have a
fee waiver so non profit groups can appeal environmental and policy issues to the Board of Supervisors
on behalf of the public without paying enormous, participation-suppressing pay to play" fees.
If you can each send a letter on by email to the Board of Supervisors Clerk as soon as possible, it will
be helpful in protecting all of our interests in environmental advocacy and policy participation by
regional groups with an interest in the environment. The County presently has the highest fee of any
jurisdiction in California which is a precedent step any public interest group who may want to appeal an
issue MUST pay to have an item considered.
Please see my prior email below) on this issue if you want to use a sample letter I prepared previously.
However, just a very simple brief statement supporting the adoption of a fee waiver for appeals to the
Board and Planning Commission for public benefit non-profits would be very helpful.
Please send your email to: cob@co.monterey.ca.us
This is a very important issue. At this point, we are looking at 50 new oil and gas wells in South
Monterey County, approximately, plus larger facilities, being proposed for the first quarter of 2011;
some of these wells will be within a distance of less than 8 miles of the National Forest and
Wilderness This drilling will have effects on air and water quality in the region, some of them
potentially very very serious. The type of drilling proposed has already been banned in some states,
including New York.
By way of introduction to this problem of fees and pay to play", it is important to understand that to
appeal any part of the approval of this set of up coming wells in Monterey County at this point would
cost $ 250,000 for planning commission review, and a cool half-million to make it all the way to the
Board. No environmental defense non-profits can afford to use their slender resources paying such a
fee set just to have their concerns reviewed and heard by the policy and decision-makers.
The fee system for hearing public concerns is cynical and corrupting of public participation; it is
another of the many moves this past year that are designed to limit public participation unless you
possess wealth, which is not the primary interest of a non-profit public benefit advocacy group.
If this email could be forwarded to John Laird secretary@resources.ca.gov) before he departs for his
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O
3�Page 2 of 5
position in the Brown administration, that would be very helpful. If we cannot prevail in having this
appeal fee eliminated at the local level, the only other option would be a statewide ban on such fees. If
Sam Farr's office will help us with this issue as well, we would be grateful.
Thanking you in advance,
Steve Craig
Steve Craig
Ventana Conservation and Land Trust
PO Box 369
Lockwood, California 93932
805) 472-2266 office)
818) 419-8229
Monday Dec 20th
To: Ventana Wilderness Alliance
Forest Watch Los Padres
Center for Biological Diversity
Pelican Network
Halt Oil Drilling Now
Ventana Conservation and Land Trust
San Antonio Valley Historical Society
California Mission Foundation
California State Parks Foundation
California Land Trust Alliance
Big Sur Land Trust
Monterey County Land Watch
Other Interested Parties
Re: Brief Letter Supporting Amending the County of Monterey Policy on Non-Profit Organization
Appeal Fees for Significant Land Use Issues
All:
I would very much appreciate your help on an important matter. The County of Monterey has a fee
structure for the appeal of decisions that sets a very high fee requirement on land use appeals if the
appeal originates in certain parts of the County, particularly south County, where various non-profits
are working on issues related to expanded oil and gas drilling, preservation of historic buildings,
affordable housing for Big Sur, school bus service funding, and related issues of consequence to the
citizens of the County.
While it is presently a no-cost process for an individual, a lawyer, a corporation, or group of individuals
to appeal a land use decision in most of the wealthier parts of the County e.g., Carmel Highlands,
Coastal Zone throughout the County, parts ofCarmel, Monterey and Salinas in unincorporated areas),
an appeal for something as simple as a zoning administrator decision can cost as much as S 4900 to start
an initial reconsideration of a decision in other, generally poorer parts of the County. In order to
exhaust administrative remedies, in the event a lawsuit is contemplated on a CEQA document, a finding
set, or a decision, more appeal fees are required to bring a decision up through the Planning
Commission to the Board of Supervisors. This process creates an undue burden on public interest
appeals which are brought to the attention of higher order decision-makers by non-profit organizations.
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 3 of 5
We are seeking support for change of this policy.
Supervisor Jane Parker is trying to address this issue and she needs our help to convince other
supervisors that a policy revision is needed on an appeal fee waiver for non-profits acting in the public
interest. The County of Monterey has the highest appeal fee of any County in central and southern
California. More documentary information on this finding is available on request from
Ventanatrust@@wildblue.net.
In addition, in the County of Monterey, there is no exemption, as is very common elsewhere within the
state for both cities and counties), for a no-cost or minimal cost appeal if the appeal is filed by a non-
profit public benefit corporation acting in the public interest. The proposed changes to the County's
policy differentiates between non-profits that function as political or economic advocates; the change in
policy would only apply to such public interest groups addressing issues of general public interest such
as affordable housing, oil and gas development, health and safety issues, and the like. Therefore,
overall, the financial consequences to the County will be minor.
At this point in time, I am requesting that all public benefit non-profits prepare a brief letter to the
Board of Supervisors supporting a change of policy to allow public benefit/public interest non-profits to
appeal decisions without fee. A copy of a sample letter is attached if you would like to save the time of
constructing your own letter or working up a comment without a complete review of the issue.
The primary message that we want to convey is:
1. non-profit public benefit organizations believe that the assessment of an appeal fee discourages
participation in important land use decisions;
2. the revision of this policy as advocated by Supervisor Parker will modify the extreme fee differential
between interior and wealthier coastal areas which presently characterizes the appeal process,
3. not all non-profit organizations would be eligible for a fee waiver; politically oriented non-profits,
political advocacy non-profits, and non-profit organizations formed to specifically enhance the
economic welfare of a segment of the economy would not qualify for this waiver--the waiver would
apply only to non-profit groups representing the public interest". Therefore, the fiscal consequences of
this waiver policy would be minimized.
4. non-profit organizations are under extraordinary financial duress at the present time due to the
economics of state and local charitable giving and the decline of government and corporate support of
non-profit activities in the public interest.
Or, if you wish, it would he fine to simply state your support for the revision of the existing fee waiver
policy by recommending that the Board adopt a fee waiver exemption for non-profit organizations
appealing a project for the public interest.
Whatever, or anything, you have time to compose in letter or email form would be very helpful. It is
helpful if individuals as well as existing' public benefit non-profits write letters of support.
Please address the email or memo to the:
Honorable Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o The Clerk ofthe Board
Re: Fee \Vaiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 4 of 5
168 Alisal
Salinas, California, 93901
Email address: cob((_@co.irionterey.ca.us
A sample letter is attached below which can be sent with the addition of your organizations name,
address and letterhead. The sample letter is in word.doc format and should be of use to most of you in
its present form. Letters from organizations are particularly critical, although general letters of support
from the public will also be influential.
If you want to contact as well individual supervisors their email addresses are as follows:
Simon Salinas:
district') u;;co.monterey.ca.us
David Potter:
district5 zco.monterey.ca.us
Jane Parker:
district4((~co.monterey.ca.us
Louis Calcagno
district2(uco.montercy.ca.us
Fernando Armenta
district 1 u-co.monterey.ca.us
* k*xxa * k**~ *a x*** k k* *** k****~k****~k************************
SAMPLE LETTER
You may copy and modify this letter as you see fit)
Date:
Honorable Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o The Clerk of the Board
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
168 Alisal
Salinas, California, 93901
Our organization, would like to express support for the proposed
modification to the Fee Waiver Program in the County of Monterey to enable non-profit organizations
to file appeals to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors without paying a fee.
to the County of Monterey, this exemption is applied unevenly and is presently granted to some ofthe
coastal and wealthier areas of the County but does not apply to non-profits acting in public benefit
capacity in many other parts of the County.
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 5 of 5
We believe this is unfair and prejudicial. It also suppresses participation by bonafide public interest
groups unable to raise the highest appeal fee of any County in the State, nearly S 5,000 per appeal, with
two appeals being required to satisfy the basic legal test of"'exhausting administrative remedies".
We do not believe that this change will have a significant impact on the County's fiscal status. The
exemption would only apply to important matters under appeal for the public benefit such as issues
related to health and welfare, preservation of historic buildings and affordable housing stock,
environmental justice, and mitigation of effects from polluting land uses).
Please adopt a fee waiver program for public benefit non-profits.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed:
Organization if you have affiliation
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 1
Z
From: patran2 patran2@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 9:20 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Cc: 100-District 3 831) 385-8333; 100-District 4 831) 883-7570; 100-District 1 831) 647-7991; 100-
District 2 831) 755-5022; 100-District 5 831) 647-7755
Subject: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
Date: January 4, 2011
Honorable Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o The Clerk of the Board
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
168 Alisal Ave
Salinas, California, 93901
I would like to express support for the proposed modification to the Fee Waiver Program in the County of
Monterey to enable non-profit organizations to file appeals to the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors without paying a fee.
In the County of Monterey, this exemption is applied unevenly and is presently granted to some of the coastal
and wealthier areas of the County but does not apply to non-profits acting in public benefit capacity in many
other parts of the County.
I believe this is unfair and prejudicial. It also suppresses participation by bonafide public interest groups unable
to raise the highest appeal fee of any County in the State, nearly $ 5,000 per appeal, with two appeals being
required to satisfy the basic legal test of exhausting administrative remedies".
I do not believe that this change will have a significant impact on the County's fiscal status. The exemption
would only apply to important matters under appeal for the public benefit such as issues related to health and
welfare, preservation of historic buildings and affordable housing stock, environmental justice, and mitigation of
effects from polluting land uses).
Please adopt a fee waiver program for public benefit non-profits.
Thank you for your consideration.
Patricia Ashe
P.O. Box 82
Lockwood, CA 93932
patran2@gmail.com
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of., Item No:
Dist 1 GAO
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
1/4/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Steve Craig ventanatrust@wildblue.net]
Thursday, January 06, 2011 4:24 PM
112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Hold Onnow; Patricia Ashe; SuRay Larry Woodfill; Ed Buntz; Bart Bartosh; Katie Banister;
Paula Getzelman; Mitchell Jan; engellj@comcast.net; Jeff Kuyper; Lisa Belenky; Tom
Hopkins; Alec Arago; Pelican Network; Novo, Mike x5192; Bauman, Lew; Markey, Kristi A.
x7576; dave.potter@co.monterey.ca.us; 100-District 3 831) 385-8333; Oliverez, Sandra L.
796-3018
Fwd: Fee Waiver Report 01-11-11 comments on the staff report
Board Report.pdf; ATT00001.txt
Received by Clerk to the Board
C41 P-) C IN Y Additional Material for
C41 Board Agenda Date of: Item No:
Board Report.pdf ATr00001.txt 395
132 KB) B)
Honorable Board of Supervisors
c/o Clerk of the Board
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Dist 1 CAO
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
Having read the Board Agenda report on this issue, I would like to add the following comments to our
previous letter:
1. The beneficiaries of entitlements should fund the entire process of application, application
defense, and if necessary, legal review for any entitlement request from the County. Currently the
County collects general funds from the citizens, application fees from the applicants, and other
sources of revenue to fund the planning process. If the application fees for planning approval are not
sufficient to include appeals, most planning departments do one of two things: 1) either they
increase the size of the fee collected at the time of application to provide funds for this contingency or
2) they require as part of an application a cost reimbursable contract arrangement with the applicant
which allows the department to collect fees to fund staff work above the fee estimate until an
entitlement is secured or denied. Therefore, the argument that somehow a waiver of fees for one
class of non-profit groups, participating as citizen planning entities, will make the activities of the
planning department run at deficit has no merit. There are numerous solutions used throughout the
state by planning and community development departments to ensure full funding of an entitlement
application process. Either of the two methods above would meet the County's financial
consequence statement in the staff report. I would suggest that the Board broaden its consideration
of alternatives to include either or both of these methods for ensuring funding to staff planning time.
2. There is no real reason for any department to be relying organizationally on citizen appeal fees for
operations of their departments. The burden of costs for an application and processing, and appeals
are part of processing, belong to the beneficiaries of entitlements, not to the citizen participant in
public due process. As residents and taxpayers, local citizens have already contributed to the
operations of the planning and other departments through allocations from the property tax
assessments to the general fund. In addition, to ask citizens to support the tax burden of property tax,
and then collect additional fees to enable them to fully participate in a CEQA or Government Code
review process is a double indemnity basically, where a citizen twice pays for County staff time to
process an entitlement application which should be fully funded by the applicant, the party benefitting
from an application. From a legal standpoint, both CEQA and the Government Code are clear that a
government agency may collect any and all costs for legitimate reimbursement for staff time to
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�process an application through to completion. In addition, nearly all government entities require the
beneficiary of an entitlement to provide court defense of any approval. The appeal process is a small
subset of the overall planning process.
3. I think it is not meritorious to assume that the definition of public benefit" cannot be clearly
defined, either in a side memorandum from County Counsel, or in some definition to be provided in
the development code. Public benefit corporations are non-profit corporations who perform services
as citizen planners and advocates for due process within the County's own framework in the
development code or, as it is called in this county, the Zoning Ordinance). As such, there is an
implied economic test within the definition of public benefit that could quite sharply distinguish
between non-profit entities involved in citizen planning as opposed to non-profits devoted to
commercial support activities, for example. Even if there is some sense that the term public benefit"
is unclear, and I doubt if County Counsel would agree with this conclusion in the staff report, none of
this type of distinction-drawing is required if the County simply amends its current procedures to allow
the planning department to collect through a reimbursement agreement all necessary costs
associated with processing an entitlement, including an appeal process.
4. The staff report raises an important distinction: coastal areas currently do not pay appeal fees. If
the County were to adopt a full cost recovery program for planning-staff, then the losses" cited in the
staff report for coastal appeals would be erased from the books. Therefore, the procedure outlined
below not only would address the present obstacles to citizen participation, it would also enable the
County to collect fees it is currently not collecting, for some unknown reason, to cover appeal
planning costs.
There is most basic principal at stake here: public participation. Making the public pay for a
developer or an oil company's planning processing expenses is simply unfair, inconsistent with the
cost recovery provisions of state law, and is easily remediable by developing a full cost recovery
reimbursement program.
We would request that the Board:
1. approve the fee waiver class as proposed by Supervisor Parker
2. obtain a definition of public benefit" corporation or non-profit public benefit organization" that is
consistent with state law relative as it is relevant to entitlement processing and then
3. amend the development code or zoning ordinance so that this definition is enshrined in law, and
finally,
4. direct staff to prepare a full cost recovery funding agreement that each entitlement applicant would
be required to sign as part of the application complete process. There would be no reason to
abandon or modify the current fee based system the County has in place; this system could remain in
place, but for those controversial cases that exceed estimated processing fees, there would be a full
funding agreement for processing through the final County decision-making process that would not
make the citizen participant fund part of the entitlement beneficiaries approval process, which is the
current arrangement.
The County staffs statement that there is a different standard of review and cost of review for coastal
areas than for the interior is a policy issue that can at least in part be ameliorated by an amendment
of the current policy as I have outlined above in a simple four step process.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this issue.
2
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Steve Craig
Director
Ventana Conservation and Land Trust
Former Community Development Director of the City of Calabasas and Cathedral City Former
Environmental Coordinator and/or CEQA Hearing Officer for the cities of Fillmore, Moorpark, Agoura,
Ventura, Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, Arcadia and others) State-wide land use consultant to cities,
counties and developers.
Begin forwarded message:
3
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�2ii: 0- EF9O304 MATTHEWS PAGE
Monterey Bay Cha cafifcwnia_Native PTant Societj
2 Via Milpitas
Carmel Valley, CA 93924
Jan. 7, 2011
Supervisor Jane. Parker, Chair.
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
168 Alisal Street
Salinas, Ca 93901
Dear Chair ae er and Supervisors:
The 1~iornter r':y Chapter of the C-aliforria Native Plant Society would like to thank you
Few inti oduc ng a plan to eiir ninate fees charged to non-profit public benefit organizations
which Ric a p als to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. We would
like to e,t pr s rorrg support for this change and to urge its approval by the Board when
this, matter or er before you next Ti esday Freif._ 1,;,.
In the past cunt' o ganizaation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization,, has seldom filed appeals
fxon admiraistrltxive deecisioris. Howeve;, when an action appears, to violate our core mis-
sion, to protect and restore California's native plant heritage, as well as the environmental
laws that srtppeft that. mission, we would like to have the option of filing an appeal f'he
records will show that when appeals are filed by filed by environmental protec6:ion groups,
the prujeicts are frequently improved for the better.
i. nforbtnat&y for many small groups like ours, the fee of nearly $500(.1 is probibitive,And
Ole 10 dw k' rtppee~e;. time bout makes it very difficult to form coalitions and raise funds in a.
timely rrnac er. A?c. understwid that the board is trying to save time and money by elimi-
nating fr loix tpl:-eaals, but the end result is pricing the public out of the decision-making
pr: ess. f`lr 9 i,
particularly important in land-use issues, where approval of proiects with-
sctt ad clr.ra m:.tagation is likely to result in permanent losses. This public right is strongly
nppo,ited by CEQA and otter environmental laws. Sometimes it is only the pr.aspect of an
appeal that hal es it possibie to reach a reasonable compromise position. To pr,)moters of
major projects, the cost of the appeal is insignificant, thus placing a heavy thumb in their
behalf on th scale of justice.
Surveys chc,* that the Monterey County fee is among the very highest in the state, even
though our Lou: Ay has arguably some of the most significant scenic, and threatened natural
habitats in the st;ste. And non-profits and local public benefit groups representing the pub-
ric health, ivelfare, 4nd safely, including enwi.ronmental considerations, have a long history
of contributing to sound planning. Most counties appear to have a fee under $500, with a
number orf 1'-ien, waiving fees for non-profits and neighborhood groups.
WW,*) cti4ri44 It
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of: Item No:
Dist 1
Dist 2
Dist 3
CAO.
County Counsel
Sincerely yours,
Mary-On Matthews
Conservation Chair
C3
ro
p
Dist 4
Dist 5
J 1)eiticated to the preservation of Cale f ornya native ova
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 1
From: engellj@comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 7:00 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Sierra Club Comments on Modification of Fee Waiver
Attachments: Appeal Fee Waiver Sierra Club Comments.doc
Attached please find Sierra Club's comments regarding the proposed changes to the county's
fee waiver on appeals.
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1
Dist 2
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
CAO.
County Counsel
1/7/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Jane Parker, Chair
168 Alisal Street
Salinas, California, 93901
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Organizations
Dear Chair Parker and Supervisors,
The Ventana Chapter of Sierra Club supports the modification to Monterey
County's Fee Waiver Program to eliminate fees charged to non-profit, public
benefit organizations when filing appeals to the Planning Commission and Board
of Supervisors.
Monterey County currently has one of the highest appeal fees of any county in
California almost $5000 per appeal. In many instances, when an initial
decision is made at the Zoning Administrator level, two appeals are necessary to
reach the Board of Supervisors and meet the legal threshold of exhausting all
administrative remedies. This cost places a heavy burden on public interest
appeals and suppresses participation by members of the public and by the public
interest and community groups who often represent them.
There is also a lack of consistency in assessment of appeal fees, as Monterey
County's Coastal Zone is exempted. In the case of appeals brought by public
benefit organizations, this inconsistency should be eliminated.
The Ventana Chapter also supports the proposed differentiation between public
interest non-profits and non-profits which function as political and economic
advocates. Only appeals in the public interest should receive this exemption.
The Chapter takes this differentiation seriously, especially in light of the fact that
non-profits organized as economic and political advocates often receive
significant sums of public money annually. For example, the Monterey County
Vintners and Growers Association received more than $400,000 from federal
sources in 2010 to promote the economic interests of their industry in Monterey
County. Organizations like MCVGA, whose budgets are augmented by
taxpayers, should not receive fee exemptions on appeals to further their
economic interests.
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Finally, the Ventana Chapter supports the proposed fee exemption for all public
interest organizations regardless of whether they have undergone the time-
consuming and costly process of incorporation as tax-exempt, non-profit
organizations. The fee exemption should apply to all community groups whose
sole interest is the public interest.
Because the appeal process is complex and demanding, and because the
proposed changes would only apply to appeals brought by public interest
organizations regarding important matters, the proposed changes should not
have any significant fiscal impact on the county.
The Ventana Chapter of Sierra Club strongly urges the board to adopt the
proposed changes to Monterey County's Fee Waiver Program.
Sincerely,
Julie Engell, Conservation Committee
Sierra Club, Ventana Chapter
JE/RD/SZ/GT
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 1
From: Barbara Woyt pulses@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 10:14 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
Honorable Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o The Clerk of the Board
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
168 Alisal
Salinas, California, 93901
I would like to express support for the proposed modification to the Fee Waiver Program in the County
of Monterey to enable non-profit organizations acting in the public interest to file appeals to the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors without paying a fee. The assessment of an appeal fee
discourages participation in important land use decisions.
All areas of the County of Monterey should have an exemption if the appeal is filed by a non-profit
public benefit corporation acting in the public interest. At this time the proposed drilling for oil using
fracking techniques in South Monterey County needs conscientious oversight from our local elected
officials.
It seems that this change will not have a significant impact on the County's fiscal status if the exemption
would only apply to important matters under appeal for the public benefit such as issues related to
health and welfare, preservation of historic buildings and affordable housing stock, environmental
justice, and mitigation of effects from polluting land uses).
Further, I think it important that concerned citizen groups without the benefit of 501 c3 status would be
assured a place at the table of these crucial issues that threaten the well being of our county lands,
resources, and people generations into the future. The local voice participating in the process
contributes to a fair and just outcome.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed:
Barbara Woyt
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of: Item No:
Dist 1 CAO.
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
1/6/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�Page 1 of 1
From: Cathy CM delllano@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:29 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee waivers for non-profits
Chair and Honorable Supervisors
MONTEREY COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD
P. O. Box 1728
Salinas, California 93902
Subject: Fee Waivers for Non-Profit Groups
Chair and Supervisor,
OI- 11-11 S-2,
As a member of the Aromas Citizens for Planned Growth we would like to go on record in
supporting Supervisor Parker's suggestion to waive fees for non-profits so they can appeal
environmental and policy issues to the Board of Supervisors on behalf of the public.
Please include this request in supporting the adoption of a fee waiver for appeals
Thank you for including this request in the public record.
Cathy Chavez Miller
2106 Leo Place, Aromas, CA 95004
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1,
Dist 2
Dist 3.
Dist 4,
Dist 5.
CAO.
County Counsel
1/6/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O3�It
Page 1 of 1
From: FRED KENYON tintent@wildblue.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:15 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone; secretary@resources.ca.gov; district3@comonterey.ca.us;
district4@comonterey.ca.us
Cc: charles ewing; Steve Craig
Subject: thoughts and request re: appeal fee processes
Attachments: Chair and Honorable Super.doc
re: Board of Supervisors discussion schd. Jan11, 2011
Thank you all for your attention.
respectfully, Carol & Fred Kenyon
Honorable Chair and Supervisors
CIO MONTEREY COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD
P. O. Box 1728
Salinas, California 93902
January 5, 2011
Dear Honorable Chair and Supervisors Re: Board Discussion January 11, 2011
Subject of Concern: Fees levied as payment by a public interest group to appeal a planning advisor's recommendation to his Board.
My wife and I retired a few years back and were among those fortunate enough to be able to invest savings to construct a house on
some property we bought 10-years ago in South Monterey County. More specifically, we're located in the Forest River Area in
Bradley next to the Nacimiento River. We are among those making ends meet on a fixed income. As an aside, although off-the-grid;
totally solar," we pay plenty of property taxes.
When we found out what was being planned for just North and East of our property by wildcat oil operations, our concern was
aroused. We became uneasy when we realized hydraulic fracturing of shale for increased recovery was and is being considered.
Attending meetings in Salinas, we discovered several test extraction wells were already in with others being drilled and many more in
the pipe line. As yet, no EIR had or has been completed. So we became involved and were among the supporters of those who objected
to the approval in our opinion, without an adequate review) of 9 more test extraction wells recommended for such approval by
planning staff.
Previously residing in Santa Barbara for 35-years, we served on several advisory boards and commissions appointed by the City
Council. The cost down there to appeal, even by an individual, last I checked, was $350. You can imagine our surprise at the steep fee
required for an appeal here in S. Monterey County.
Being older than 65, we believed the appeal fee for us seniors would be dismissed. Contributing to a public interest group a 501-C3)
made us fairly certain the $5000 fee rumored to be the highest in the state by far) would be at least partially refunded as it is in many
California counties. Instead, and to our surprise, there seems to be an attempt to justify it. We're aware that public funds are in dire
straits, but free public input regarding our community shouldn't be penalized. Please reconsider your appeal fee structure.
We'd like to thank Supervisor Parker for bringing this issue to the Board's attention and ask that our comments be included in the
meeting record. And of course, we're both always available for more detailed comments if requested.
Sincerely,
Fred and Carol Kenyon
75529 Deer Pass Road
Bradley, CA 93426 805-729-0490
FYI there is a hard copy in the mail. Cc-ed to Congressman Farr. We request our letter be included in the meeti
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1
gmatrr.
Dist 3
Dist 4.
Dist 5,
CAO.
County Counsel
1/6/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3�Honorable Chair and Supervisors
C/O MONTEREY COUNTY CLERK OF THE BOARD
P. O. Box 1728
Salinas, California 93902
January 5, 2011
Dear Honorable Chair and Supervisors Re: Board Discussion January 11, 2011
Subject of Concern: Fees levied as payment by a public interest group to appeal a
planning advisor's recommendation to his Board.
My wife and I retired a few years back and were among those fortunate enough to be able
to invest savings to construct a house on some property we bought 10-years ago in South
Monterey County. More specifically, we're located in the Forest River Area in Bradley
next to the Nacimiento River. We are among those making ends meet on a fixed income.
As an aside, although off-the-grid; totally solar," we pay plenty of property taxes.
When we found out what was being planned for just North and East of our property by
wildcat oil operations, our concern was aroused. We became uneasy when we realized
hydraulic fracturing of shale for increased recovery was and is being considered.
Attending meetings in Salinas, we discovered several test extraction wells were already
in with others being drilled and many more in the pipe line. As yet, no EIR had or has
been completed. So we became involved and were among the supporters of those who
objected to the approval in our opinion, without an adequate review) of 9 more test
extraction wells recommended for such approval by planning staff.
Previously residing in Santa Barbara for 35-years, we served on several advisory boards
and commissions appointed by the City Council. The cost down there to appeal, even by
an individual, last I checked, was $350. You can imagine our surprise at the steep fee
required for an appeal here in S. Monterey County.
Being older than 65, we believed the appeal fee for us seniors would be dismissed.
Contributing to a public interest group a 501-C3) made us fairly certain the $5000 fee
rumored to be the highest in the state by far) would be at least partially refunded as it is
in many California counties. Instead, and to our surprise, there seems to be an attempt to
justify it. We're aware that public funds are in dire straits, but free public input regarding
our community shouldn't be penalized. Please reconsider your appeal fee structure.
We'd like to thank Supervisor Parker for bringing this issue to the Board's attention and
ask that our comments be included in the meeting record. And of course, we're both
always available for more detailed comments if requested.
Sincerely,
Fred and Carol Kenyon
75529 Deer Pass Road
Bradley, CA 93426 805-729-0490
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3�From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jocumentl.doc 41
KB)
Dale Hillard hillard@salinas.net]
Monday, January 10, 2011 4:32 PM
112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Letter to BOS Jan.11 Agenda Item S-2
Document1.doc
To whom it may concern,
I have faxed 4:30 pm) to 831-755-5888 the below letter from River Road Rancher.
Sincerely,
Dale Hillard
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3�A. S
Agenda Om t'-2
uo; rd O
REF 10045
Januag 1!1 20 hi
Dear F3oar6 of River ask for your m.z in
Cy s
iil`.'L'r oac l`.C-7: 4 if E:[ d: t:VC?. liiS riv~`~trda''? 1~o ter"V Dtlnty
r?i: ti.t.S t:c i. P-t' rds 10 Ag WAS aii�:, I TO ci C. a g_oc'i1
dot'mA have A-: i4St Ct t C'i f_' p-'!-S or is c bas wlhi~Tl
TiiL' r_`~)i:� no ask al Or yo= L'[iii: 1S Y) a` dOs_ Warier Prcgram
t3 at OL:`_ 1,F-~ L., r$:Cd 1. 4~ Eke j.~:1' L. s\c:::.~:=~:~ tea l_eu i'Wng
pp dti the n rf 1 i l' and the %Si?i5rd of Sup mst,rs.
1 7'._tL.' o
Sincerely,
Dare s(-ti
Chair' sZ,'.- r-r Read S umhu_
co E30 MY W,
1, o r. a i:.Ot
tl`.,� li.:�. 1.-; 1 /
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3� Page 1 of 1
From: dipti.ejcw@gmail.com on behalf of Dipti Bhatnagar dipti@ejcw.org]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 10:16 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone; dave potter; 100-District 3 831) 385-8333; 100-District 1
Subject: 831) 647-7991; 100-District 2 831) 755-5022; 100-District 4 831) 883-7570;
831) 647-7755; Dunham, Darlene R. 796-3019; Markey, Kristi A. x7576
EJCW support for waiver of appeal fees 1 00-District 5
Attachments: EJCW support for appeal fee waiver-to MoCo supervisors_1 Ojan11.pdf
Dear Monterey County Supervisors,
Attached please find a 2-pg letter of support from the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
EJCW) for the waiver of appeal fees for public interest organizations and poor communities in inland
Monterey County.
I thank you for your consideration of this important matter,
Dipti Bhatnagar
Northern California Program Director
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water EJCW)
1201 Martin Luther King Jr Way
Preservation Park, Oakland, CA 94612
Work: 510-286-8402
Cell: 510-504-2876
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O 3�Page 1 of 1
C~ e
From: CVA President carmelvalleyassociation@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 11:08 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee Waiver Comments
Attachments: Fee Waiver Itr 1.11.11.doc
Thank you for getting the attached letter to the Supervisors before the hearing
tomorrow.
Christine Williams
Christine Williams, President
Carmel Valley Association
P. 0. Box 157, CV, 93924
659-1307
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O!3�Carmel Valley Association
Box 157, Carmel Valley, California 93924
cartttyly}alie wassoociation.orr,r
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Jane Parker, Chair
168 W. Alisal Street
Salinas, CA 93901
RE: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Organizations
Chair Parker and Supervisors,
The Carmel Valley Association is in its 62�d year of representing residents up and down the Carmel Valley.
We have hundreds of members, and operate exclusively as an all-volunteer group, funded by membership fees
and donations only.
The Carmel Valley Association is in support of amending the Monterey County's Fee Waiver Program.
Eliminating or drastically reducing the fees charged to non-profit, public benefit organizations when filing
appeals to the Planning Commission and/or Board of Supervisors on land use issues is in the best interest of an
open and accessible public process.
As it stands now, the appeal fees are prohibitive. The appeal fees in our County are among the highest of any
county in California, almost $5000 per appeal. That's a cost of almost $10,000, should a group feel the need
to appeal from the Zoning Administrator level up to the Board of Supervisors. We have heard, on many
occasions, disbelief among the public when they hear the high cost of appeal. Many having come here from
other counties, just shake their heads. Only in Monterey County!" we hear.
Any group that is supported by the public, and acts on behalf of the public for no monetary gain, should have
an exemption from these fees. Some groups work on a limited budget, and the fees literally squeeze such
groups completely out of the public process. It's also an unconscionable discrepancy that those who live in
the coastal areas, generally those who are wealthier, have no appeal fees at all, while the rest of the County has
exorbitant ones. That inequity must be rectified.
We do support the proposed differentiation between public interest non-profits and those non-profit groups
which advocate for political and economic change. The exemption should be reserved for groups who are
acting in the public interest only and funded by voluntary donations, not funded by tax money, nor receiving
economic gain.
We also support the exemption for all public interest organizations, whether they receive a tax exemption or
not, as long as they are working on behalf of the public interest and represent a group of citizens.
Carmel Valley Association fully supports, and strongly requests that the board direct staff to come back with
policy wording to amend the resolution on fee waivers that is equitable and removes the cost barrier for public
interest groups to be able to appeal when necessary. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Christine Williams, President
To preserve. protect and defend the natural beauty and resources of Carmel Valley
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O"3�L
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
BofSnonprofitappea
Is.pdf.doc
Michael Weaver michaelrweaver@mac.com] 1 y
Monday, January 10, 2011 10:16 AM 1 \
100-District 1 831) 647-7991; 100-District 2 831) 755-5022; 100-District 3 831) 385-8333;
100-District 4 831) 883-7570; 100-District 5 831) 647-7755
112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
January 11, 2011 Agenda item S-2
BofSnonprofitappeals.pdf.doc
Dear Supervisors,
For your review and consideration.
Thank you,
Mike Weaver
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O#3�Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o Clerk to the Board
Via fax: 831-755-5888
and via email to Supervisors Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5
Re: January 11, 2011 Board Hearing
Agenda Item S-2
Board of Supervisors consider to broaden and/or clarify
the circumstances for appeals to include non-profit
organizations representing the public interest
REF 10045
January 10, 2010
Dear Board of Supervisors,
I am the Chairperson for the non-profit Highway 68 Coalition. We are a recognized tax
exempt 501( c 4 organization. However we are not incorporated with the State of
California. We are volunteers. No one has a salary. Donations are used to cover basic
needs such as postage and copying costs. Members of the Highway 68 Coalition have
been attending public hearings, following, and responding to important County issues for
approximately twenty years. There has never been a monetary charge for doing this.
Much of the area adjacent to California Scenic State Highway 68 lies in the
unincorporated portions of Monterey County. State Highway 68 travels through
three Monterey County Area Plans; Greater Salinas, Toro, and Greater Monterey
Peninsula.
Most of this broad area has no elected representation except for Supervisors on the Board
of Supervisors. Occasionally issues arise that must be brought to the attention of
the Board of Supervisors for their counsel and direction. Sometimes issues require
the formal agenda attention of the Board of Supervisors. It is a severe financial hardship
to have to pay to get this formal attention in the case of appeals to the Board.
As Chairperson for the Highway 68 Coalition I urge you to amend the County Fee
Waiver Policy and grant non-profits such as the Highway 68 Coalition, access to appeal
issues to your decision making power, without having to pay for it.
Thank you for your consideration of this.
Sincerely,
Mike Weaver
Chair, The Highway 68 Coalition
c/o 52 Corral de Tierra
Salinas, CA 93908
Email: highway68coalition@yahoo.com
Phone: 831-484-6659
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O$3�From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dale Hillard hillard@salinas.net]
Monday, January 10, 2011 4:32 PM
112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Letter to BOS Jan.11 Agenda Item S-2
Document1.doc
Documentl.doc 41
KB)
To whom it may concern,
I have faxed 4:30 pm) to 831-755-5888 the below letter from River Road Rancher.
Sincerely,
Dale Hillard
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O%3�Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o Clerk to the Board
Via fax: 831-755-5888
and via email to Supervisors Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5
Re: January 11, 2011 Board Hearing
Agenda Item S-2
Board of Supervisors consider to broaden and/or clarify
the circumstances for appeals to include non-profit
organizations representing the public interest
REF 10045
January 10, 2010
Dear Board of Supervisors,
River Road Ranchers ask for your support in the adoption of the Monterey County's Fee
Wavier Program.
River Road Ranchers Toro Area) has made comments regarding Monterey County
polices in regards to Ag Buffers and GUP-5. We are a group of concerned citizens that
doesn't have the financial resources that developers or the agriculture industry has when
it comes to the county appeal process.
Therefore we ask for your approval to change the Monterey Count Fee Wavier Program
that would eliminate fees charged to groups like River Road Ranchers when filling
appeals to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sincerely,
Dale Hillard
Chair, River Road Ranchers
c/o 830 River Rd.
Salinas, CA 93908
Email: hillard@salinas.net
Phone: 831-455-2980
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O&3�Page 1 of 1
From: DON ARGANBRIGHT shootingstarfarm@wildblue.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 5:28 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Cc: 100-District 3 831) 385-8333; 100-District 5 831) 647-7755; 100-District 4 831) 883-7570; 100-
District 2 831) 755-5022; 100-District 1 831) 647-7991; DON ARGANBRIGHT
Subject: Fee Waiver Request
Honorable Monterey County Board of Supervisors
c/o The Clerk of the Board
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Non-profit Organizations
168 Alisal
Salinas, California, 93901
I would like to respectfully express my support for the proposed modification to the Fee Waiver
Program in the County of Monterey to enable non-profit organizations to file appeals to the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors without paying a fee. I believe that this would be the fair thing to
do. To do otherwise is, im my opinion, consorting with private corporations against the will of the
people who live here
Please adopt a fee waiver program for public benefit non-profits.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Dr Donald G. Arganbright
Shooting Star Farm
Lockwood, CA 93932
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O'3�Page 1 of 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Molly Erickson erickson@stamplaw.us]
Monday, January 10, 2011 5:20 PM
100-District 1 831) 647-7991; 100-District 2 831) 755-5022; 100-District 3 831) 385-8333;
100-District 4 831) 883-7570; 100-District 5 831) 647-7755
Cc: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Support for Appeal Fee Waiver Proposal
Attachments: TOMP.Itr.to.BOS.11.01.10.support. for.appeal.fee.waiver.pdf
Chair Parker and Members of the Board of Supervisors:
Attached is a letter on behalf of The Open Monterey Project in support of the proposed appeal fee
waiver for organizations representing the public interest.
Thank you.
Regards,
Molly Erickson
Law Offices of Michael W. Stamp
479 Pacific Street, Suite One
Monterey, CA 93940
tel: 831-373-1214
fax: 831-373-0242
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O(3�1k
LAW OFFICES OF
MICHAEL W. STAMP
Facsimile 479 Pacific Street, Suite 1 Telephone
831) 373-0242 Monterey, California 93940 831) 373-1214
January 10, 2011
Jane Parker, Chair
and Members of the Board of Supervisors
County of Monterey
168 W. Alisal Street, 15' Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
Subject: January 11, 2011 Board Agenda Item No. S-2
Amendment of County Fee Waiver Policy
Dear Chair Parker and Members of the Board of Supervisors:
On behalf of The Open Monterey Project, this Office would like to comment on
the January 11, 2011 Agenda item S-2 regarding the Board's broadening and/or
clarifying the circumstances for appeals to include non-profit organizations representing
the public interest.
The proposed broadened policy would apply to groups across the County,
including groups who do not historically participate in land use decisions, including
farmworker advocacy groups and organizations representing the interest of workers
generally.
The Open Monterey Project would like to express its support for a reduction or
waiver of the appeal fee for organizations representing the public interest.
The County's appeal fee of $4,903.64 is prohibitively expensive for non-profit
organizations whose goal is to further the public interest. We urge the Board to amend
the County Fee Waiver Policy to include non-profit organizations representing the public
interest.
Very truly yours,
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O)3�From: Boyd, Arlene P. 759-6642
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:08 PM
To: 100-BoS Everyone
Cc: Bauman, Lew; McKee, Charles J; Novo, Mike x5192; Holm, Carl P. x5103
Subject: FW: Fee waiver revisions for public benefit organizations
Attachments: image001.png; image002.png; image003.gif
Good Afternoon,
Please see attached correspondence for tomorrow's meeting. Thank you.
Arlene Boyd
Senior Secretary
Clerk of the Board
County of Monterey
168 W. Alisal St 1st Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
831) 755-5066
Direct: 831) 759-6642
Fax: 831) 755-5888
From: Chris Flescher mailto:cflescher@mclw.org]
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 5:42 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Fee waiver revisions for public benefit organizations
Land
montemy county
Post Office Box 1876, Salinas, CA 93902
Email: LandWatch@mclw.org
Website: www.landwatch.org
Telephone: 831-759-2824
FAX: 831-759-2825
January 8, 2010
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Jane Parker, Chair
168 Alisal Street
Salinas, California, 93901
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O*3�Page 2 of 3
Re: Fee Waiver Revisions for Public Benefit Organizations
Dear Chair Parker and Supervisors,
Land Watch urges the Board to adopt the proposed changes to the Monterey County Fee Waiver Policy
to include fee exemptions for non-profit, public benefit organizations.
LandWatch is a community-based nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting and inspiring sound
land use policies through grassroots community action. Unfortunately, in Monterey County, public
participation in government often requires far more than dedication and inspiration. Often, it also
requires lots of cash.
Monterey County currently has one of the highest appeal fees of any county in California almost
$5000 per appeal. When members of the public must file multiple appeals to exhaust their
administrative remedies, the cost of public participation is often doubled. This economic obstacle limits
effective and consistent participation in the governmental process and converts what should be a
citizen's right to due process into an economic privilege available to an exclusive few.
Because Monterey County's Coastal Zone is exempted from appeal fees, there is also a lack of
consistency in assessments which consequently discriminates against all citizens in the inland areas of
the county. This inconsistency should be and would be eliminated by the proposed changes to the Fee
Waiver Policy.
In opposing the policy changes, staff cites losses resulting from coastal appeals. LandWatch must point
out that these losses are, and always have been, unnecessary. Under CEQA, the county can collect from
applicants any and all costs to process an application through to completion. Appeals cannot occur
outside of the application process. Therefore appeals should be categorized as costs of processing an
application; and they should be collected from the applicant. The coastal appeals losses that county staff
cites are costs of application that have been shifted onto the county's citizens who already help fund the
process through property tax, sales tax and other tax allocations to the general fund which supports the
county's various departments. In the case of inland areas of the county, the cost of appeal is shouldered
entirely by the appellant.
In Monterey County's coastal areas, the effect of the current policy is to allow the gift of public funds to
applicants. In Monterey County's inland areas the effect of the current policy is far worse. It suppresses
public participation. It improperly taxes appellants for costs of an application designed to benefit the
applicant. It discriminates against an entire group of citizens by geographic area.
There is no reason Monterey County should suffer losses as part of the application process. The fact
that the county does so now can be easily remedied. For example, just as the county insists on
indemnification clauses in all its development agreements, the county could implement application
agreements which include a clause covering the cost of appeals. Alternatively, the county could simply
increase application fees to cover average projected costs of appeals.
LandWatch urges the county to adopt the proposed changes to the Fee Waiver Policy. In addition,
LandWatch urges the county to direct staff to develop the process necessary to ensure full-cost recovery
on all applications.
Sincerely,
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O+3�Page 3 of 3
Amy White, Executive Director
LandWatch Monterey County
1/10/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O,3�Comments to Board of Supervisors, 11 Jan 2010
I am Ed Mitchell speaking for the Prunedale Neighbors
Group. I urge you to eliminate the current county requirement
that established community organizations and non-profit
corporations must pay a fee to appeal land use or commercial
developments requiring CEQA review. It is in the public's
best interest to require the applicant for entitlement to
fund the fee rather than community organizations impacted by
new developments.
This fact has been proven many times in the last 13 years
that I have observed and participated in many CEQA efforts
both in North County in other portions of Monterey County.
Here are a few examples where non-profit and/or community
organizations surfaced significant negative issues not
revealed by CEQA analysis. As you well know, in many
instances the courts and/or county agencies and commissions
agreed with the non-profits or community organizations:
September Ranch surfaced faulty water availability
analysis and the county allowing an applicant to ghost write
planning staff position papers.
Rancho San Juan after appeal, included initiatives
voted on county-wide and passing with super-majority votes
agreeing with the community group's revelation that huge
water and traffic impacts were not in the public's best
interest.
Carlsen Estates surfaced missing fire protection
water tanks, improper perculation testing, and repeated
septic envelope set back violations
Heritage Oaks revealed a lack of sustainable water
Unlike other California counties that require the
applicant seeking entitlement to pay the fee, this county
penalizes public non-profit organizations monitoring their
community. Currently the fee is a penalty hindering public
participation in the CEQA review process instead of an
incentive to the applicant to perform adequate CEQA analysis.
Please vote in favor or lifting the fee for non-profit
corporations.
Ed Mitchell
663-3021
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O-3�Z-_
Page 1 of I
From: David Ginsberg davidg@whigmaleerie.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 1:47 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: 1/11/11 Fee Waiver Hearing to permit public benefit non-profits to appeal projects without paying
currently required fees
I know the hearing is supposed to be getting underway right around now, so I hope these comments are not
moot, but I wanted to express my support for the request to waive the normal fees for community-based non-
profits to appeal oil exploration and extraction permit applications in South County.
My wife and I own 40 acres in Lockwood. We are not opposed to oil and mineral exploration and extraction per
se, but we are extremely concerned that before any such activities are approved, there must be a thorough
investigation of the environmental and ecological impact of such activities, and there must be ongoing
monitoring of these activities to ensure there is no harm to the air or water in the Salinas, Hames and San
Antonio Valleys. We are very concerned about the apparent explosion in drilling activity in South County, and
from what we have seen so far, do not believe adequate research and investigation has been done to ensure
that any drilling that occurs does so in a safe and sustainable way without damage to the environment.
Given the number of applications for such activity we have been made aware of, and the likelihood that there
may have to be appeals of a number of the applications, the currently required fees would impose an undue
burden on the individuals and community organizations who have been raising these concerns. For Venoco and
other corporate entities which are filing the permit applications, the cost of such appeals is merely a cost of
doing business. But for the property owners and residents of these communities, the normally required fees are
a substantial burden. We would therefore urge you to waive these fees.
Thank you very much for considering our opinion.
David Ginsberg and Yvonne Davis
APN 423-331-034-000
Cor. Martinez Rd. and Lockwood-San Ardo Rd., Lockwood
Mail:
21034 Chatsworth Street
Chatsworth, CA 91311
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O.3�Page 1 of 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pelican Network CoastalHabitat@PelicanNetwork.net]
Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11:52 AM
112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Steve Craig
Fee Waiver Support
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Green
Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors,
County of Monterey, California
Please favorably consider the fee waiver request for the concerned citizens of South
Monterey County who need to have adequate review of the fracking proposals.
Sincerely,
Jack Ellwanger
Pelican Network
1/11/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O/3�Page 1 of 1
From: James M. Kelley phoenixhood@razzolink.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 9:21 AM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone
Subject: Waiver of fees
Monterey County Board of Supervisors:
Please allow me to express my support for a waiver of fees for public benefit non-profits to appeal an
item to the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors.
Thank you,
Jim Kelley
1/11/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O03�Comments to Board of Supervisors, 11 Jan 2010
I am Ed Mitchell speaking for the Prunedale Neighbors
Group. I urge you to eliminate the current county requirement
that established community organizations and non-profit
corporations must pay a fee to appeal land use or commercial
developments requiring CEQA review. It is in the public's
best interest to require the applicant for entitlement to
fund the fee rather than community organizations impacted by
new developments.
This fact has been proven many times in the last 13 years
that I have observed and participated in many CEQA efforts
both in North County in other portions of Monterey County.
Here are a few examples where non-profit and/or community
organizations surfaced significant negative issues not
revealed by CEQA analysis. As you well know, in many
instances the courts and/or county agencies and commissions
agreed with the non-profits or community organizations:
September Ranch surfaced faulty water availability
analysis and the county allowing an applicant to ghost write
planning staff position papers.
Rancho San Juan after appeal, included initiatives
voted on county-wide and passing with super-majority votes
agreeing with the community group's revelation that huge
water and traffic impacts were not in the public's best
interest.
Carlsen Estates surfaced missing fire protection
water tanks, improper perculation testing, and repeated
septic envelope set back violations
Heritage Oaks revealed a lack of sustainable water
Unlike other California counties that require the
applicant seeking entitlement to pay the fee, this county
penalizes public non-profit organizations monitoring their
community. Currently the fee is a penalty hindering public
participation in the CEQA review process instead of an
incentive to the applicant to perform adequate CEQA analysis.
Please vote in favor or lifting the fee for non-profit
corporations.
Ed Mitchell
663-3021
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O13�I- I S Z-
From: Link, Claudia J. x5022
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 12:58 PM
To: 112-Clerk of the Board Everyone; Borkowski, Gail T. x5842
Cc: Gowin, Henry M.
Subject: Jan 11 BOS mtg
Attachments: Cal Poly President Emeritus Robert E. Kennedy Dies.htm
Supervisor Calcagno would like to adjourn the January 11, 2011 BOS meeting in memory of Robert
E. Kennedy, Cal Poly President Emeritus.
Robert was Stephen Kennedys father.
Stephen Kennedy is the Director of Child Support Services for Monterey County.
Below is additional information about Robert Kennedy.
Thank you,
Claudia
From: Link, Claudia J. x5022 On Behalf Of Gowin, Henry M.
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 12:51 PM
To: Link, Claudia J. x5022
Subject:
f
Cal Poly President
Emeritus Ro...
Received by Clerk to the Board
Additional Material for
Board Agenda Date of. Item No:
Dist 1 CAO
Dist 2 County Counsel
Dist 3
Dist 4
Dist 5
1
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O23�Cal Poly President Emeritus Robert E. Kennedy Dies
CAL PoLY
Dec. 27, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Matt Lazier, Public Affairs
805-756-7109; mlazier@calpoly.edu
SHARE
Cal Poly President Emeritus Robert E. Kennedy Dies
SAN LUIS OBISPO Cal Poly President Emeritus Robert E.
Kennedy, who led the university for more than 12 years and who
remained engaged with Cal Poly for decades after his retirement,
has died. Kennedy's family alerted the university that he passed
away Christmas Day at age 95.
Kennedy was named the president of California State Polytechnic
College in 1967 and retired Feb. 1, 1979, as president of California
Polytechnic State University. As the institution's seventh president,
he oversaw a period of significant, concentrated growth.
Dr. Kennedy led the campus through a key period of its
transformation, when Cal Poly became a university and expanded
its academic offerings to accommodate the tidal wave of Baby
Boomer enrollment," said Interim President Robert Glidden.
However, Dr. Kennedy's interest in the campus did not end upon
his retirement; he remained an ardent supporter of Cal Poly's
educational mission throughout his life. He has served the university
well in a variety of ways for 70 years. He will be missed, but the
mark he made on Cal Poly is significant and lasting."
Kennedy took charge of a campus of just more than 8,000 students.
At the time, the curriculum was divided into four units: the schools of
Agriculture, Engineering, Applied Arts and Applied Sciences. When
he retired, Cal Poly had nearly 16,000 students and boasted seven
schools: Agriculture and Natural Resources, Architecture and
Environmental Design, Business and Social Sciences,
Robert E. Kennedy
Click here to view a photo slideshow
about President Kennedy
Requires Flash player download Flash free
Communicative Arts and Humanities, Engineering and Technology, Human Development and Education, and Science and
Mathematics.
New, vs
Page 1 of 2
Unr-rsiiy Nevus & Information
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California
file://C:\Documents and Settings\hancockd\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5... 1/5/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
PUBLIC COMMENT�T��"�|E�O33�Cal Poly President Emeritus Robert E. Kennedy Dies Page 2 of 2
The campus doubled in size to 6,000 acres under Kennedy's watch, with the addition of 3,000 acres of federal surplus land
from nearby Camp San Luis Obispo. And the face of the campus changed significantly, with the addition of major buildings
such as Science North, Computer Science, the Julian A. McPhee University Union, Yosemite Hall, the Sierra Madre dorms,
Vista Grande Restaurant now Sage), Architecture and Environmental Design, and the Clyde P. Fisher Science Building.
Kennedy joined the Cal Poly faculty in 1940 as a journalism instructor and served as adviser to student publications. During
WWII, with the arrival of U.S. Naval training programs on the Cal Poly campus, he instructed cadets in communications.
Kennedy became head of Cal Poly's Journalism Department in 1946. Three years later, he also took on the role of the
school's public relations director. He served as assistant to President Julian McPhee from 1950 to 1957; dean of the Arts and
Sciences Division from 1957 to 1959; and vice president of Cal Poly from 1959 to 1967.
During his long tenure as faculty and administrator, Kennedy represented Cal Poly on numerous state and national education
councils.
In recognition of his dedicated service to and profound influence on Cal Poly, the California State University trustees voted
upon his retirement to name the campus's new library building the Robert E. Kennedy Library.
A memorial service for Kennedy is planned for 11 a.m. Saturday, Jan 15, 2011, at the San Luis Obispo United Methodist
Church, 1515 Fredricks St. in San Luis Obispo.
CP Home CP Find It Get Adobe Reader Help Accessing Public Affairs Web Content
Cal Poly News Web Cal Poly Magazine Cal Poly Update E- Public Affairs Office
newsletter California Polytechnic State University
Giving to Cal Poly
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
polynews at] calpoly.edu
file://C:\Documents and Settings\hancockd\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5... 1/5/2011
BIB]
40572-U01
PUBLIC-U02
COMMENT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO98131-U03
C14-U03
CORRESPONDENCE-U03
1/28/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
SIGNED BOARD REPORT"�|E���MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MEETING: January 11, 2011 AGENDA NO: S-2
SUBJECT: Consider amending the County Fee Waiver Policy August 2000) to broaden and/or
clarify the circumstances for appeals to include non-profit organizations representing the public
interest.
Fee Waiver/Board Referral 2010.22 REF 100045, Countywide)
Project Location: Countywide APN: Countywide
Planning Number: REF100045 Name: Monterey County
Plan Area: Countywide Flagged
Zoning Designation: multiple and N/A
CEQA Action: TBD Staked:
DEPARTMENT: RMA Planning Department, County Counsel
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors consider to broaden and/or clarify the
circumstances for appeals to include non-profit organizations representing the public interest and
direct staff to make no changes to the current County Fee Waiver Policy August 2000).
SUMMARY:
On October 6, 2010, Supervisor Parker requested for staff to consider to broaden and/or clarify
the circumstances for appeals to include non-profit organizations representing the public interest
to the current County Fee Waiver Policy August 2000). This policy authorizes the Director of
Planning to consider fee waivers based on nine criteria Exhibit 1). One criterion includes:
development, enhancement, expansion or modification of needed community facilities by non-
profit organizations and community groups meeting certain criteria. Requests not meeting the
listed criteria may be considered by the Planning Commission. In addition to waivers, there is no
fee to appeal projects located in the coastal zone.
DISCUSSION:
The current Fee Waiver criteria for non-profit organizations are verifiable. However, criteria to
verify that organizations are representing the public interest would be difficult to ascertain, other
than their personal claim. As such, the proposed addition would open the door for anyone
making such claim. Staff finds that there are a few options for the board to consider:
Option 1: Amend the County Codes to authorize a Supervisor to appeal an item at their
discretion with support of a second Supervisor. The Coastal Commission has a
similar process.
Option 2: Reduce the appeal fee. The current appeal fee is $4,903.64.
Option 3: Direct staff to return with a resolution amending the Fee Waiver Policy to add
non-profit organizations representing the public interest.
The financial implications of the current fee waiver policy, the loss of coastal zone appeal
revenue, and the current subsidy for the appeal fee has a substantial impact on the land use
departments.
BIB]
40610-U01
SIGNED-U02
BOARD-U02
REPORT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO99278-U03
C1-U03
GENERAL-U03
DOCUMENTS-U03
3/7/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012
SIGNED BOARD REPORT"�|E���Staff recommends no change to the Fee Waiver policy for the reasons noted in this report.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
Fee waiver requests are circulated to County land use agencies Planning, Public Works,
Environmental Health, Water Resources, County Counsel) for consideration and to calculate the
amount of funds that would be lost.
FINANCING:
Any option identified in this report impacts the General Fund by providing a service without
compensation. Over the past three years using the current criteria), the Planning Department
has granted 43 fee waivers, which has resulted in a loss of revenue as follows:
PLANNING ENV
HEALTH
WRA
PW
COUNSEL SURCHARGES
GP/TECH)
TOTAL
2008 $138,665.13 $ 26,243.77 $18,678.69 $18,035.95 $17,075.70 $ 1,034.70 $219,733.94
2009 $ 34,517.16 $ 5,152.30 $ 5,689.15 $ 3,232.25 $ 4,324.90 $ 1,791.72 $ 54,707.48
2010 $ 91,530.76 $ 13,457.14 $13,634.42 $ 7,887.35 $ 7,858.35 $ 8,052.70 $142,420.72
ITOTAL $264,713.05 $ 44,853.21 $38,002.26 $29,155.55 $29,258.95 $ 10,879.12 $416,862.14
In fiscal year FY) 2009/10 the Planning Department processed 17 appeals 60% coastal), and
for the first /z of FY 2010/11, we have received 13 50% coastal). Inland appeals in FY 2009/10
resulted in revenue totaling about $33,750; Coastal zone appeals in FY 2009/10 resulted in a loss
of revenue totaling about $48,215 in addition to the loss of revenue resulting from waivers. For
appeals that we receive payment, the amount of planning department staff time for an appeal is
reimbursed at about 70% of the actual work put into the review and response. Appeals in the
inland area are reduced by having a fee. Assuming the number of appeals processed with no fee
would rise to the same level as coastal zone appeals, the proposed addition to fee waivers would
result in a potential financial impact of about $34,000 based on FY 2009/2010 revenue).
Approved by:
Car P Hol AICP Mike Novo, AICP
Assistant Director
RMA-Planning Department
755-5103; holmcp@co.monterey.ca.us
Director
RMA-Planning Department
This report was prepared with assistance by Wendy Strimling, Deputy County Counsel
cc: Front Counter Copy; Board of Supervisor's 16); County Counsel; Environmental Health Bureau; Public Works;
Monterey County Water Resources Agency; Office of Emergency Services, California Coastal Commission; Mike
Novo; Carl Holm; Les Girard; Distribution List; Project File
Attachments:
Exhibit 1 Fee Waiver Criteria
Exhibit 2 Board Order
BIB]
40610-U01
SIGNED-U02
BOARD-U02
REPORT-U02
LI21329-U03
FO96183-U03
FO96184-U03
FO97017-U03
MG97055-U03
AS97074-U03
AS97080-U03
AI97535-U03
DO99278-U03
C1-U03
GENERAL-U03
DOCUMENTS-U03
3/7/2011-U04
BORENM-U04
15914-U05
1-U06
CONSIDER-U07
AMENDING-U07
THE-U07
COUNTY-U07
FEE-U07
WAIVER-U07
POLICY-U07
AUGUST-U07
2000)-U07
TO-U07
BROADEN-U07
AND/OR-U07
CLARIFY-U07
THE-U07
CIRCUMSTANCES-U07
APPEALS-U07
TO-U07
INCLUDE-U07
NON-PROFIT-U07
293-P&BI-U08
ROTHARMEL-U09
LINDA-U09
ROTHARMELL-U10
12/28/2010-U011
ORGANIZATIONS-U012
REPRESENTING-U012
THE-U012
PUBLIC-U012
INTEREST.-U012
FEE-U012
WAIVER/BOARD-U012
REFERRAL-U012
2010.22-U012
U012
REF100045,-U012
COUNTYWIDE)-U012