Letters to the editor

The Salinas Californian
Posted on April 14, 2007


Farmers are backbone of local economy

Personal attacks are a poor substitute for honest argument, as Paul Cetano demonstrates in his April 12 letter attacking the farm families who form the backbone of Monterey County's history, culture and economy.

Apparently Cetano wants farm land but no farmers, and that's just what he might get if Measure A passes. Its inflexible policies will cripple agriculture and its ability to compete in a global market.

Perhaps Cetano doesn't know the family farmers who work hard every day to provide jobs and opportunity. Our farmers stake their land and future on the vagaries of unpredictable nature, shifting markets and worldwide competition. When they succeed they share their good fortune by providing jobs and generous support for community causes. Their hard work makes
this land produce over $3 billion in farm products every year, making this the fourth most productive farm county in the nation.

General Plan Update 4 includes an agricultural element and incorporates protections for agriculture in almost every other element. It supplies the tools farmers need to stay on the land and remain successful.

Measure A would restrict agriculture and undermine its ability to compete, leading to lost jobs, a shrinking economy and less opportunity for all. It would destroy the agricultural heritage and economic health of Monterey County. That's why farmers and ranchers oppose Measure A.

Bob Perkins, executive director
Monterey County Farm Bureau


Initiative is a detriment to zoning

The issue of how the General Plan Initiative affects zoning in Monterey County, particularly industrial and commercial, illustrates the poor language in the Initiative.

LandWatch says the Initiative allows "any other structure permitted by this General Plan" as being allowed on a legal lot of record. Shame on them! The catch is the phrase "permitted by this General Plan." Planning basics dictate that zoning must follow the general plan.

Virtually all land-use attorneys who have read the Initiative believe it has the potential to rezone the entire county. The devil is in the details. Problems arise because the Initiative text repeatedly refers to land outside Community Areas as only being suitable for agriculture or one single-family residence. Additionally, the Initiative text ambiguously juxtaposes two sets of land use maps (2 and 13) which are functionally inconsistent. If the Initiative passes, the outcome will likely cost huge amounts of money for trying to sort through the legal mess. Ultimately we may be without opportunity to locate
businesses, ag processing operations, medical facilities or group residential homes.

Jay Brown
Bradley


Initiative will protect farmland

Developments on farmland require police and fire protection, code enforcement, street repairs and other services. Housing developments will not bring enough tax revenue to pay for them.

The county has a budget deficit. Therefore these services will be taken from other already underserved communities. Turning farms into suburbs uses up investment dollars that would be spent improving cities.

The Community General Plan Initiative (Measure A) addresses these problems by protecting farmland from development and focusing development where services are.

The Supervisors' general plan, GPU4 (Measure C) would siphon our tax and investment dollars onto presently zoned farmland, to the detriment of all - except the developers and out-of-state corporations that own the farm land. These are reasons why I'm voting "yes" on A and "no" on C.

Joy Osborne
Pebble Beach