Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 03081994 - IO.5
TDy _ 13' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I .O.-5 5:---L _ Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa g s County DATE: February 28, 1994 sr' COoUu '9 NT SUBJECT: ABILITY TO ALLOW "CLUSTERING" OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS ON PARCELS AT MORE THAN ONE DWELLING PER 40 ACRES AND ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AGRICULTURAL SOILS TRUST FUND SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . CONCLUDE that itis currently possible to allow clustering at one residential dwelling per 40 acres through the use of the administrative variance procedure, as is outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 2 . CONCLUDE that a General Plan amendment would be necessary to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core in order to permit "clustering" of residential dwellings at no more than one per ten acres, with a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights, as is outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 3 . DETERMINE whether to authorize a General Plan study in order to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core in order to permit "clustering" of residential dwellings at no more than one per ten acres, with a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights, as is outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 4 . ACCEPT the attached staff memorandum report . on the Agricultural Soils Trust Fund and direct staff from the Community Development Department to report to the *Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on the structure and function of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OUNTY AD N51ST ECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE THER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ONi. 1994APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X— OTHER The Board APPROVED Recommendations 11 2, 41 5 and 6 relating to clustering of residential dwellings on agricultural land' and the establishment of an agricultural soils trust fund. The Board REQUESTED staff to bring back Item 3 at a later time to consider whether to authorize a General Plan study in order to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT I & IV ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED March 8, 1994 Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: See Page 3 SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY , DEPUTY i I .O.-5 5 . DIRECT staff from the Community Development Department to report to the Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on those actions which are necessary in order to modify the provisions of the A-40 zoning to enhance the economic viability of agriculture and to comment on whether such a change would be consistent with the General Plan, as the Board directed on January 25, 1994 . 6 . DIRECT the Community Development Director to report to our Committee on March 28, 1994 on staff ' s review, analysis and comments on the papers submitted by the Mt. Diablo Audubon Society, the Citizens Land Alliance and any other agencies or individuals on the subject of large lot rezoning, as was directed by the Board on January 11, 1994 . BACKGROUND: On January 11, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to report to the Internal Operations Committee at its second meeting in February on his comments and recommendations regarding the papers submitted by the Audubon Society and Citizens Land Alliance. The Community Development Director has requested an additional 30 days in which to complete this report and we are recommending that this extension of time be agreed to. On January 25, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to develop a mechanism for the implementation of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund which could be used to purchase future development rights on prime agricultural land, to be funded in part by the $1 agricultural mitigation fee at the Keller Canyon Landfill . In addition, on January 25, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to report to the Internal Operations Committee on the development of a program for clustering of multiple residences on a 40 acre parcel including no more than one residence for each ten acres, utilizing a common-interest development concept for a parcel where the residences could be clustered in close proximity to each other and the balance of the land could be utilized in an economically viable manner for agriculture. Under this concept, it might be possible for individual residences to be individually owned and for the remaining agricultural land to be owned in common. This would include a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights . On February 28, 1994, our Committee considered each of these referrals . We are recommending that the Community Development Director be provided an additional 30 days in which to report on the large lot rezoning issue. On February 28, 1994, our Committee received and considered the attached report from Dennis Barry on the "clustering" concept. It is clear from this report that clustering is possible at no more than one residential dwelling per 40 acres (plus, in some cases, a second residential dwelling and a dwelling for farm worker housing with a land use permit) . This report also notes the problems with clustering at one residential unit per 10 acres and the need for a General Plan amendment in order to make this type of clustering a reality. We are asking that the Board of Supervisors determine whether to go to the expense and time involved in authorizing a General Plan amendment and CEQA review on this proposal, which might result in a potential for an additional 300 to 400 units in the agricultural core of the County. On February 28, 1994, our Committee also received and considered the attached staff report on the development of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund. Of the options suggested in the staff report, our Committee believes that it is important that the Board of Supervisors utilize an advisory committee of some sort which could provide broad input and advice to the Board of Supervisors on the purchase of development rights. Staff have indicated that they -2- f i I .O.-5 will be prepared to return to our Committee on March 28, 1994 with further details on how such a Trust Fund could be developed and implemented. We think that it may be more important at this time to get this Trust Fund in place than it is to undertake the General Plan amendment necessary to implement the "clustering" concept at one unit per 10 acre density. Finally, the Board of Supervisors, on January 25, 1994 , directed staff from the Community Development Department to report on those actions which are necessary in order to accomplish enhanced economic viability for agriculture, including a change which would allow "permitted uses" in A-20 zoning to also be "permitted uses" in A-40 zoning and to comment on whether such a change would be consistent with the General Plan. We are suggesting that this report be made to our Committee on March 28, 1994 . Following our Committee's consideration of all of these reports on March 28, 1994 our Committee will be prepared to make additional reports to the Board of Supervisors on these referrals . cc: County Administrator Val Alexeeff, Director Growth Management and Economic Development Agency Harvey Bragdon, Community Development Director Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Dennis Barry, Community Development Department Jim Cutler, Community Development Department -3- DATE: 3 ' REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) 02. Complete this, form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: ►� �wR� � PHONE: s►v-� �f sao� ADDREss: P-o Qat( X53 c _ CITY: �i �rRoN I am speaking formyself OR organization: c,1i-12 A1_S I-A0 6 ALL"ANc�i NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # _V6 5 . My comments will be: general( for against I wish to speak on the subject of Ars cokz 6�zoN w r I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) (0 Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: ( 3 3 ( !`art. - Cc , !�d �� J' CITY: - � I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: (NA4 OF ORGANIZAMON)���Ptex c _ I wish to speak on Agenda Item # S My comments will be: general -2f�— for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. t 0 JsCONTRA COSTA COUNTY o' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: February 18, 1994 TO: Internal Operations Committee FROM: Dennis M. Barry, AICP Deputy Director SUBJECT: Residential Clustering in the Agricultural Core ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On January 25, 1994, the Board of Supervisors adopted, with minor modifications, your committee recommendations of January 3, 1994 regarding 40 acre minimum parcels in the Agricultural Core area of the County. The second numbered point in the report directed the Community Development Director to ' . . .review all options for clustering residences on various sized parcels to determine what is feasible, with the objective of preserving the spirit and letter of Measure C, even if a General Plan Amendmnet is necessary in order to allow such clustering while still remaining consistent with measure C. . . " This report responds to that directive. The January 25, 1994 Board Order included direction to consider at least two options. The first of these was "Clustering of multiple 40 acre parcels involving no more than one residence for each 40 acres. After reviewing the County General Plan and Zoning Ordinance provisions in the A-40 Exclusive Agriculture District, staff finds that this option is presently available to property owners through the administrative variance procedure. Section 84-80.1204 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that "Variance permits may be granted pursuant to section 84-80.1202 to allow the clustering of single family dwellings on lots where: (1) Such action is consistent with the General Plan; (2) The design of the dwelling cluster is, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator; and (3) Development rights, grants, and or open space and conservation easements are conveyed to the county for the portion of the lots not covered by the clustered dwellings. Such conveyance shall be valid for the period of time specified by the planning agency but not to exceed twenty five years. " Variance permits were included for the purpose of clustering in order to vary the yard requirements, including twenty fire feet in the front yard and fifty feet in the side yard. The variance procedure also affords the opportunity for design review and inclusion of conditions of approval, as appropriate. The administrative review involves mailing notice of intent to render an administrative decision to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The notice gives people the opprtunity to request a public hearing on the matter; if no request is received within ten days, the item is considered by the Zoning Administrator without a public hearing. It should be noted that the zoning ordinance also contains provisions allowing for the approval of both farmworker housing and an additional single family residence by issuance of a land use permit. Presumably, these structures could also be clustered by means of the process outlined above, although staff does not recall any instances of requests being submitted for such an application of the various code provisions. A variant of this first option would be for the County to modify the yard requirements in the District to eliminate the need to consider variances, while inserting standards related to the clustering design. If an applicant met all of the standards, the building permit could be issued. It seems doubtful that the provision for requiring a twenty five year easement or deed of development rights would pass muster as a standard for the placement of a residential structure on an agricultural parcel, but we would need to research the point more fully to definitively address the issue. The second option included in the January 25 Board Order, as amended, reads as follows: B. Clustering of multiple residences on a 40 Acre parcel including no more than one residence for each ten acres, utilizing a common interest development concept for a parcel where the residences could be clustered in close proximity to each other and the balance of the land could be utilized in an economically viable manner for agriculture, with permanent dedication of potential future development rights. Under this concept, it might be possible for individual residences to be individually owned and for the remaining agricultural land to be owned in common. While Measure C contains provisions related to lot size in the prime soils, it does not contain specific density provisions. The measure does contain permissive language regarding clustering, however. This leads us to conclude that the Board of Supervisors is ultimately responsible for determining what the appropriate density in the Agricultural Core will be. Ultimately, the provisions of the plan will be judged, at least in part, upon whether they represent a wholly integrated, internally consistent set of policies. Currently, the County General Plan contains a density limitation in the Agricultural Core designation of one unit per forty acres. Consideration of a proposed common interest development is regulated through the subdivision process; it requires filing a map and adoption by the planning agency of the findings needed to approve such a map, including a finding of consistency with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan. In order to consider option B further, a General Plan amendment would be needed, at a minimum to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core. If such an amendment were to be considered, it should also set forth the policy basis and objectives which are outlined in Option B, thus providing the underlying policy basis for the approval of subdivision maps for proposed common interest developments. In addition, such an amendment should also include a discussion of the balancing of objectives being addressed; enhancing the economic viability of agriculture and permanent preservation objectives. All of the discussion above pertaining to variance provisions for clustering in the A-40 Zoning district would be equally applicable in the event of the suggested General Plan Amendment. Consideration of a General Plan Amendment with the objective of allowing for the common interest development of Agricultural Core properties would be a project subject to CEQA. Preliminary analysis of data contained in the attached Table 1 indicates that approximately one-half of the properties in the Agricultural Core are at least 40 acres in size. Assuming that all eligible parcels took advantage of the proposed concept, some 557 units could be added to the area. In addition, it is not unreasonable to assume that at least some of the smaller parcel in the area could join together to qualify for the added density. Ultimately, about 600 units could be assumed to be added to the area. Two factors would tend to reduce these figures; the presence of Agricultural Preserve Contracts under the Williamson Act and the existence of individual units on current lots. Although more precise estimates would need to be done for CEQA purposes, for discussion, it could be estimated that 300-400 units could be created through this mechanism in the agricultural core area. The Initial Study for the project would need to carefully consider and fully disclose the potential effect of allowance of this or a more precicely estimated magnitude of development and habitation in order to comply with CEQA. Finally, it is worth pointing out that common interest developments can be structured in such a way that ownership interest is divided between airspace and common interest in the development, or the individual structures can be owned individually, with a common interest in the land and other improvements. In order for owners to take advantage of these choices, it would be important that any general plan amendment or ordinances enacted in this regard not limit the individual interest to "air space" as the concept has traditionally been carried out in residential common interest developments. Conclusions Clustering of units in the A-40 Zoning District is currently an available option. Under the existing General Plan it could be accomplished at densities that do not exceed one unit per 40 acres. If the Board of Supervisors wishes to proceed with the increased density of one unit per f-� acres in a common interest development, with permanent dedication of the remainder of development rights, then a General Plan Amendment study should be approved, a funding source identified and the CEQA process undertaken, leading to public hearings before the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the Board to consider in a separate public hearing. Table 1 -Parcels over 40 acres in size in the Agricultural Core and Estimated Development Potential A B C D E 2 ;.... 3 016-190-013 79.06 7 4 015-040-002 46.1 4 5 015-040-040 46.71 4 6 . 015-040-042 45.62 4 7 015-050-001 49.05 4 8 015-050-002 49.05 4 9 015-030-004 56.137 5 10 015-040-013 66.89 6 11 015-050-017 55.61 5 12 015-050-006 43.9 4 13 015-060-002 242.32 24 14 015-070-008 44.81 4 15 015-010-009 90.61 9 16 015-140-014 299.18 29 17 015-150-001 141.53 14 18 015-150-003 160 16 19 007-110-001 178 17 20 010-080-004 41.33 4 21 011-010-009 77.264 7 22 011-020-001 60 6 23 011-020-009 82.401 8 24 011-010-003 59.97 6 25 011-020-003 94.35 9 26 011-010-004 100.66 10 27 011-020-006 53.63 5 28 011-140-008 78.26 7 29 011-130-001 72.94 7 30 011-140-013 140.56 14 31 011-130-002 72.94 7 32 011-130-004 54.11 5 33 011-013-009 64.07 6 34 011-150-003 50.185 5 35 011-150-001 78.33 7 36 011-160-010 51.5 5 37 011-150-004 156 15 38 010-070-001 81.58 8 39 007-130-003 48.01 4 40 007-130-004 48.6 4 41 007-130-005 51.85 5 42 010-200-006 110.43 11 43 010-220-015 107.37 10 44 007-140-014 45.08 4 45 011-030-002 96.7 9 46 011-030-003 154.94 15 47 011-140-002 77.06 7 48 011-050-009 199.8 20 49 011-070-005 52 5 50 011-120-032 60.58 6 51 011-11.0-009 57.48 5 52 011-170-011 154.32 15 53 011-180-001 59.61 6 Page 1 Table 1 -Parcels over 40 acres in size in the Agricultural Core and Estimated Development Potential A B C D E 2 ;;: .....................:......................................................................................................... 54 011-180-026 58.313 5 55 011-190-001 78.894 7 56 011-170-002 79.6 8 57 011-180-051 47.43 4 58 011-170-002 79.6 8 59 007-140-014 45.08 4 60 011-050-005 41.96 4 61 011-060-023 50.78 5 62 003-070-001 52.97 5 63 003-070-001 79.14 7 64 011-070-011 84.52 8 65 011-070-009 41.79 4 66 003-090-008 57.44 5 67 011-080-017 50.18 5 68 011-190-030 68.462 6 69 002-010-014 40 4 70 003-070-004 91.57 9 71 003-070-003 78.6 7 72 003-130-001 125.75 12 73 003-090-008 57.44 5 74 002-010-013 40 4 75 002-010-016 44 4 76 TOTALS 5882.01 557 77 78 Ag Core Acreage: 11,644 %of acreage in 40 ac parcels=50.4 Page 2 tl Contra Costa County T0, S Community Development Department DATE: February 23, 1994 TO: Internal Operations Committee FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon, Director by Matt Tomas, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Interim Report on Agricultural Soils Trust Fund I. INTRODUCTION - On January 18, 1994, the Board of Supervisors considered an earlier report and set of recommendations from the Internal Operations Committee regarding various agricultural-related projects. Among the IO's recommendations was acknowledgement by the Board for a trust fund for purposes of protecting agricultural resources and the need for a mechanism to administer the trust fund. This report outlines and discusses possible options for achieving this objective and also makes specific recommendation for a course of action. II. FUNDING SOURCES - The Board has already identified the Keller Canyon Landfill agricultural and open space mitigation fees — $250,000 already resides in an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund and a similar amount has been projected for the coming fiscal year 1994-95 — as the revenue source to be used to purchase development rights in agricultural areas. III. MECHANISM TO IDENTIFY AND RECOMMEND AREAS FOR ACQUISITION - With an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund and revenues already in place, the next question to discuss is what manner might be available for using trust monies? Two options exist which rely on creating an entity for using existing trust funds. The first option is to create a land trust while the second is to establish an agricultural preservation district. The basic differences between these two approaches are described in the following sections. A Land Trust - Creation of a land trust has been a common means in the state for protecting open space and agricultural resources. Land trusts are not "trusts" in the legal sense, but in fact are more commonly known as conservancies, foundations or associations. These entities are usually private, nonprofit and tax-exempt in nature and when created, file legal documents with the state (corporations office) that define their status as such. Having non-profit status provides many benefits, one of which allows the trust to apply for any public funds which may be available through a variety of grant programs. Land trusts are generally non-government, private agencies and are governed by a Board of Directors. In this case, the land trust would sponsor and develop an agricultural resources inventory which would be the basis for prioritizing the acquisition of development rights or land in fee. Land trusts might rely staffs of the various agencies in which they work with and many times rely on the volunteer resources of their membership. An example of a local land trust here in Contra Costa County is the Martinez Regional Land Trust which focuses their effort in the Briones Agricultural Preservation Area. The Trust for Public Lands is another land trust and does work throughout the Bay Area and has, in the past, worked on a variety of land acquisition projects in tandem with the County and other local jurisdictions. An Agricultural Preservation District - Establishment of an agricultural preservation district is another option to consider. A recent example of a such an entity was provided in November 1990, when Sonoma County voters passed into law two measures which 1) established an agricultural and open space district and 2) created a sales tax, the proceeds to be used by the district for acquiring interests —usually through a conservation easement—in real property. Under this model, the District becomes a governmental entity (special district), with the Board of Supervisors serving as the governing body of the newly formed district. The boundaries of the District are the same as the county. Like Sonoma County, the primary purpose for forming such a district is to implement state policy (as expressed in Government Code §65562) to recognize that open space lands, including agricultural lands, is "a limited resource which must be conserved whenever possible. The District would only purchase real property interests (either development rights, creation of a conservation easement or purchase land in fee) from willing sellers. The District would be prohibited from exercising the power of eminent domain to acquire property. Function - The function of either a land trust of agricultural preservation district is to protect land permanently and directly through a variety of means including donations of property, purchase of land in fee, or assistance to landowners to establish legal restrictions on the development of land. Whatever form this function takes will lead to the development of policies and procedures for the proper management of those real property interests which come under the authority of the trust/district. The County General Plan already sets the policy groundwork for pursing and developing this concept further. There are a variety of options the trust/district might use in the daily operation of such a body such as using staffs from existing agencies for land management or monitoring activities. These details and others would be the focus of future work should the I.O Committee and Board wish to implement this concept. IV. RECOMMENDATION - Staff suggests that the 10 Committee recommend the following to the Board: 1) With input from the 10 Committee, request staff to return in one month's time with a formal recommendation on the structure and function of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund, Implementation Program. Attachments A) Sonoma County Agricultural&Open Space District Legislation • Copies of text of legislation and informational brochure. B) Land Trust Information-National Office of the Land Trust Alliance f � y DC� 2 Q U V G f•. w y V C13 O yy b y O to U W o v G u t° r,... a' d o O .[ G p . . •.gg f1ti. H C� 'L^ c! a •G R O *9 p .p. G V > � O V G Q w g `:�1 ��\ y O h O 3 N-U N ' U y \ O y A E 3 r ��is�.,'..,. Sc'',�..rj r:;�s Q Q V � .��. R v pJ � .fl S.. � w R � � Ol 'L3 c��C `ti •� a:. �'' Q t-� ° ° gym,' ' .,ter-. OR d o v • x G {-. .n v tl 4 Eny y� h r 3 CS'U a d 1. M O O R .D Ji R V G O R ty v b, _� O `n .{y o�kk y��.\ ♦:i Q� v C ~„ ►yy. �r0•.� Gl d �V" '�i a. .� x .L O .0 R �i a may O /�`s�y: \�\�� � - +�+ w � .D G « �.^ r" 'r•. O � v a. .. .,d �. R .i' •N G , O � 3 00 > > r. oo�G] _o �+ �oo (1) 00 IV.0 ccs!'. a:9 Ccc w o IV d G vG G d 0 �, G C ct F O w o v� 00 p O .. -D V poo v o 5 N 0 (13 bo _ ... O. a X0 G a R G 'n rn O y O Otj bo 0) j5 w � a V d Cr V O bO •R O V >! 0) H R `�' A d S1.N G fro F V Z o L1 d u a u O. y O O ►. o 0o nQ.�C z o p P.y a � u �A as °zo R F p co7y M o. Uaa d log �' d � a � a w 10" L,'� "'; w R g y O � HR y• 9 .20. V O �p r O _ O bo u 0! Ow .y OG UP0RtGv4gi 14 ca C" oN tn 0 :35 ° OO Sy % N R •oo� RwG (v O m CN x T -�J m G Ci O G Ow" p G G 3 env 6r d y >. ar ', oo o f. w U aEco o c c o cc ;s v G D a E a v 0 — d C aGi ca .°cOG ya eO ox-*0 3cRa, &rr O ° O > aG 0cc x r_ ooa ° � oaoa cG � oo c 0. 0 � o � � oC �3 a+ z F ^� v a, u 0 m d O ° h y a p0' c aL m a °A �� > n a G w � 3 w RLS y �� �R �. E o C Op O l; d v G d R y w ch O C R d E (5 OPV. G C ���»i '� V y q O a O . m r. cw 0.j (n �CS G E R D -0 T N R T3 . rte.ti O ° N O w O v u v � O ,IOC G � V y E .� v u0i •v c�a id o vi .a R V ►� O1 y 3 G w R '�'i G .� w v p a >, 5 14 (UO •L c a V o a .� V w •� d �v 00 O 00 G �j �'+ m 0 �0 .�. a av • a o ° v .0 o cGa C C.° U U O Z R D E V .� o A 3r oo a b o a � ' A bO AV 0 "a ao °ouq': N "6 o �°G , S4 '0 G y N > pd w b .�+ o y �y A t p NN Og wO .d 0.> .. � a � A NRri A UcyG tGa " Gm ° o0Apc�, a $ °' q d G pp a ' •C `° �° o-C ^r T(J tr ¢Z, 0• A t1) y G Pi pU O G �s. . O Uy �+ � " a .r � Q � .- aX1� O eta• '4 d r. `d'i �„ •• N e0 G'Q po p � G y V app t(3 a Sr+ QA t7' p ° G .n I&SS O r A d Q G °� � a i j .+ +' t ... r ^J G Q y� ' 4 it2' j G p a ° r�► � d 'O �N � � � � � O W y M i0 X- - V) j A a ,� 'O . � � � .ty G '� •r3 3 G •cs G � v q �' � •� � .. G ooiy y U "id r, .> y O o .�'+ 'C V H •aC� <4 `��' a O' �Y d P+ rG+ v to GN O G G tY{n x R{ a C by A G G O w 7` ��. r U r O O N O O K a s SSJ. o t (� °n . 0. rN' :6 H ,ate�•''A � ?'�� �, r � �" VG pr G w D QOj � a rO1 fY w m G pG a A Oy^�� u� y toG�D AC+. pp .0. �v, �s 7 b° '�Q N d Z N� a•T, RAS} pO Q.E" UO A Q r CS > O p,g; W a 6� G u i Q O +' A a "�•' Q„ „..tb O •� A S cVC O•`'+ eO6 aG d 'pC r d G V o; N .�.+ A A G N N A g V d N W O 'W L © aG A O a A r a > C• O p� a , 3 � G Q O O R yy di � sq, c Q A a pJ t3 A a0�nj O G G dj 6� O s O N QJaG A 41 v 0 G.t1.G O tY +a- ^.. p "�y W t�0 O to oN, v U ° i° ' . .r aGi a C� O ss � O•G a A i a p .ayG ami O � y � .�' d q �i.�.oGi G � a r 4-� 'aO � G �G d. V w Z A cs o .0- p � -.N.. > V O G .y a N a O v a G p N o M y O j5 aO v Y y 0 N .G d r3 ca a 9� u o Gy A v N a a r W r y G ?L N a a fi ! N A 3 m G � G G G O > ” d 6Oi G yc. G d ! d N W^ N O G 20 , 3 N✓ `�'+ �OpO Q. �C S0ao �7' N•N •G G N A V a "S3 to y' tq Q "� 87 _ S. �' a RS t/� V i•' �,d Vic.. r w ° eOa °' N"v ' ^ o bo W r '¢ d � � � °'- � " ? y Ja m h o. ai 3 ¢ G uoioac � y d o -' ya � po°� yUE; .. � 'K» ,c ,G ... G r. y y r Op A tv KS A a G a A �'i tab .0 v w bU r.. O j Q r+ U .- .N .•� ,.. V s+ y'L} .iy+ yf G, Jj ty, a V p a T. sy ."-�+ to N �+ '-•�' .ty .. Sa' 4NyQ p i 75-+ �T 'r' O O GI d6�! 510 G O nr. om' �yy ip+y {.� S 40! $ 6 d 6GJ egg tI3 d X •' �j y W .' A p� p "' y H t1+ m IF a G G G O W o A y G l y bD' U 4 `i n .. fl' rn V' a� V fi x+ ti °"4 .^.A. ¢ to r au, ^G p A S�j d tNa � d �° d � ,°„ , a 'd ON o y u o 61 V O d fj go: p G ° o. cgi G O - U COUNTY OF SONOMA 14. That the formation of the District is exempt from the requirements of OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FORMATION - the California Environmental Duality Act as a program or project which is MEASURE A submitted to a vote of the people (California Administrative Code §15378(b)(4)J. --- 15. . ..15. That resolution no. 90-1419,dated July 24, 1990, is hereby rescinded. SUPERVISORS: e Shall the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space SUPERVSUPERVIS absent HAROERSON aye SMITH absent d District be created and established? NICHOLAS aye ESPOSTI aye I AYES 3 NOES 0 ABSTAIN 0 ABSENT 2 s FULL TEXT OF MEASURE A SO ORDERED. RESOLUTION NO.90-1532 is Dated: August 14, 1990 le at RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SO- NOMA.STATE OF CALIFORNIA,CONCLUDING THE PUBLIC HEARING.CALL- ING A SPECIAL ELECTION ON THE FORMATION OF THE SONOMA COUNTY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND-THE es ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT, ORDERING LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION to NOTICE OF ELECTION.ORDERING CONSOLIDATION OF THE SPECIAL ELEC- SONOMA COUNTY OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FORMATION Are TION WITH THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 1990. MEASURE A no REFERRING THE MATTER TO THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMIS- ;he SION EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SEC- This proposition is to form the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and TION 5517.1. AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 90-1419, DATED JULY Open Space District. The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open 24. 1990 Space District would be a governmental entity,with the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors serving as the governing body of the district.The boundaries of the WHEREAS. this Board did on July 10. 1990 adopt resolution no. 90-1286 district would be the same as the boundaries of Sonoma County. noticing a public hearing on the question of the formation of the proposed The primary purpose for forming the district is to implement slate polity(as Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District;and expressed in Government Code Section 65562) to recognize that open space is WHEREAS, that public hearing has been correctly noticed and all persons ..a limited resource which must be conserved whenever possible."This public present were allowed to hear and be heard;and entity would have the authority to accept donations of real property and purchase WHEREAS, following the conclusion of the public hearing this Board did real property from willing sellers for the purpose of open space and agricultural adopt resolution no. 90-1419, dated July 24, 1990 which resolution incor- preservation. The district would be prohibited from exercising the power of rectly set forth the language of the ballot measure in a manner that does not eminent domain to acquire property. meet the requirements of Public Resources Code section 5518; If formed, the district would be financed by gifts, grants, special taxes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board of Supervisors general obligation bonds, and other revenue sources permitted by law. How- hereby finds,declares,determines and orders as follows: ever, the measure in and of itself would not authorize the levy of any taxes. If 1. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. formed,it is proposed that the district be financed through a contract with the 2. That the public hearing is concluded. Sonoma County Open Space Authority.The Open Space Authority has placed a 3. The name of the district shall be the Sonoma County Agricultural quarter-cent sales tax measure on the November ballot for the purpose of Preservation and Open Space District. financing open space acquisition. 4. The reason for forming the district is to further the slate policy on the A favorable vote on this issue would result in the formation of the district and preservation of open space expressed in Government Code section 65562 and set an annual appropriations limit.The vote required to confirm the formation of to implement the Agricultural and Open Space Elements of the 1989 Sonoma the district is a majority favorable vote on the question. County General Plan. 5. That the District shall only purchase interests in real property from s7 Vivian Look willing sellers. Assistant Executive Officer 6. That all lands within the boundaries of the district will be benefitted by Sonoma County Local Agency Formation being included within the district. Commission(L AFCO) 7. It is proposed that the district will be financed by gifts,grants,special taxes, general obligation bonds and other sources of revenue authorized by law or any combination thereof. 8. The boundaries of the district be coterminous with the boundaries of the County of Sonoma. 9. The annual appropriations limit of the district shall be$20 million. 10. A special election on the following question is hereby called to be held on November 6. 1990: Shall the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and YES Open Space District be created and established? NO I t. The special election is hereby ordered consolidated with the November 6. 1990 general election and the County Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to do all things required by law to conduct the election. 12. In accordance with Public Resources Code section 5517, the Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be published once a week for ! three successive weeks prior to the date of the election in the Press Democrat, 13. In accordance with Public Resources Code section 5517.1, the Clerk shall deliver a copy of this resolution, within live days of its adoption, by registered mail to the Executive Officer of the Sonoma County Local Agency I.: 70rmation Commission for the preparation of an impartial analysis to be included with the sample ballot. 49-51 j ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE A SONOMA COUNTY OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FORMATION The Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District has broad-based, nonpartisan support. Businesspeople, farmers, environmentalists and elec- ted officials all worked together to put this measure on the ballot. Now irs your turn to take action.We urge you to vote YES. We believe that a majority of Sonoma County residents want a stable agricultural economy,protection of natural habitat,greenbelts separating our cities and soothing scenic vistas. The District would have NO REGULATORY AUTHORITY.It would work with WILLING SELLERS to VOLUNTARILY implement the Agricultural, Open Space and Resource Conservation Elements of the Sonoma County General Plan. We think it important to know that the District can ACCEPT GIFTS of land, development rights and specific easements.It can also PURCHASE these real estate interests AT FAIR MARKET VALUE from WILLING SELLERS.Land- owners who donate or sell conservation easements (also known as agri- cultural, scenic and open space easements)voluntarily give up development rights,not ownership.They still own the land and can keep it,sell it or pass it to heirs. It is also important to know that AGRICULTURAL LAND can continue to be used for agricultural purposes. The formation of the District will not cost the taxpayers any money. TO PRESERVE OUR AGRICULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE, OUR SCENIC BEAUTY AND OPENNESS,OUR AIR AND WATER OUALITY AND TO PREVENT URBAN SPRAWL, WE ASK EVERYONE TO VOTE YES ON THIS MEASURE. st Mitchel Mulas st Bill Carte Dairy Farmer Attorney sl W.C. "Bob" Trowbridge st Dee Swanhuyser NO ARGUMENT AGAINST THIS MEASURE Recreational Businessman Board of Directors WAS SUBMITTED st Clint Wilson Greenbelt Alliance Businessman 49-52 COUNTY OF SONOMA Revenue and Taxation Code section 7285.5(a).- provided, however, that the AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION taxes imposed by this ordinance shall not be levied unless and until (1) MEASURE C Assembly Bill 3670,now pending in the Legislature,is enacted into law or(2) the State Board of Equalization-acknowledges that the rate of the tax does not exceed 0.25 percent. "Etteclive date" means the dale that this ordinance is adopted by the District's Board of Directors. Shall the people of Sonoma County approve an ordinance for agri Section 3. PURPOSE. This ordinance is adopted to achieve the follow- cultural land preservation and open space acquisition, imposing a ing, among other, purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be 0.25 percent sales tax for a period not to exceed 20 years, with an interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes: annual appropriations limit of$40 million? A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code which authorizes the District to adopt this tax ordinance which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the FULL TEXT OF MEASURE C measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION purpose. ANO OPEN SPACE EXPENDITURE PLAN 8. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance which incorpo- rates provisions identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of I EXHIBIT A California insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the require- ments and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and The purpose of this expenditure plan is to implement the 1989 Sonoma Taxation Code. County General Plari by preserving agricultural land use and open space.This C. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance which imposes a purpose will be accomplished primarily through the purchase of development tax and provides a measure therefor that can be administered and collected by rights from willing sellers in areas of the County which are designated in the the State Board of Equalization in a manner that adapts itself as fully as General Plan Open Space Element but may include the purchase of fee practicable to, and requires the feast possible deviation from, the existing interests for public recreation where the public use would not be inconsistent statutory and administrative procedures followed by the State Board of with the Open Space designation provided below. Equalization in administering and collecting the California State Sales and Use Designated open space areas include community separators,scenic land- Taxes. scape units,scenic corridors,critical habitat areas and riparian corridors. D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance which can be 1. Community separators are generally located between cities, providing administered in a manner which will be. to the greatest degree possible. visual relief from continuous urbanization.These lands are frequently subject consistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and to development pressures, and therefore, have been identified as priority Taxation Code,minimize the cost of collecting the transactions and use taxes sites for acquisition to prevent urban sprawl, to retain the rural and open and at the same time minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons character of the County and to preserve agricultural uses. subject to taxation under the provisions of this ordinance. 2. Scenic landscape units and scenic corridors are areas of high visual E. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance which will quality. produce revenue for the purposes set forth in the Expenditure Plan adopted 3. Critical habitat areas and riparian corridors,such as wetlands,rare and by this Board of Directors on August 9. 1990 by its resolution no. 2 endangered species locations,fresh and salt water marshes,oak savannahs, entitled: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA streams and watercourses, are environmentally sensitive areas requiring COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY ADOPTING AN EXPENDITURE PLAN and protection and careful management. which resolution is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated 4. Other areas of biotic significance which may be adversely impacted by herein as though fully set forth. development and incompatible land use are the Petaluma River, Laguna de Section 4. CONTRACT WITH STATE. Prior to the operative date, the Santa Rosa,and San Pablo Bay margin. District shall contract with the State Board of Equalization to perform all 5. Other open space projects including, but not limited to, urban open functions incident to the administration and operation of this transactions and space projects within incorporated areas of Sonoma County.Funds for these use tax ordinance:provided.that it the District shall not have contracted with projects will be available on a competitive matching grant basis,with prefer- the State Board of Equalization prior to the operative date, it shall neverthe- enee given to acquisition and development projects which affect both incor- less so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of porated and unincorporated lands and watercourses. Examples of such the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract. projects include restoration of the Petaluma River and Santa Rosa Creek. Section 5. TRANSACTIONS TAX RATE. For the privilege of selling tan- This expenditure plan shall be administered by the Sonoma County Agri- gible personal property at retail,a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in cultural Preservation and Open Space District and the Authority shall enter the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the District at the maximum into a contract with the District for that purpose. rate of one quarter of one percent(0.25 percent)of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the operative date of this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 1 Section 6. PLACE OF SALE. For the purposes of this ordinance,all retail (FULL TEXT) sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the AN ORDINANCE OF THE SONOMA COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY IM- tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an POSING A RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX, SUBJECT TO VOTER out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an out-of-state RATIFICATION, IN THE INCORPORATED AND UNINCORPORATED TERRI- destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery i TORY OF SONOMA COUNTY FOR A PERIOD OF TWENTY YEARS, AND charges. when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax. ESTABLISHING AN ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT. regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the State or has more than one place of The Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Open Space Authority business,the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by ordains as follows: the Slate Board of Equalization. Section 1. TITLE. This ordinance shall be known as the Sonoma County Open Space Authority Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance. The Sonoma Section 7. USE TAX RATE. An excise tax of hereby imposed on the County Open Space Authority hereinafter shall be called "District." This storage,use or other consumption in the District 01 tangible personal proper- ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory ty purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date of to f one of the County of Sonoma, which territory shall be referred to herein as Hance for storage,use or other consumption in said territory at the rate of one oDistrict o quarter of one percent (0.25 percent)of the sales price of the property. The Section 2. OPERATIVE AND EFFECTIVE DATES. "Operative date" sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made. means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the ratification of this ordinance by the voters as required by Continued Next Page 49-59 such property,for any period of time for which the lessor is obligated to.lease MEASURE C, FULL TEXT(Continued) the property for an amount fixed by the lease prior to the operative date of this Section 8. ADOPTION OF PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW. Except as other- ordinance. wise provided in this ordinance and except insofar as they are inconsistent (5) For the poeposes of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation sale or lease of tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated Code, all of the provisions of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code are hereby adopted and made a the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or part of this ordinance as though fully set forth herein. lease upon notice,whether or not such right is exercised. Section 9. PERMIT NOT REOUIRED. If a seller's permit has been issued C. There is exempted from the use tax imposed by this ordinance, the to a retailer under Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, an storage, use or other consumption in this District of tangible personal additional transactor's permit shall not be required by this ordinance. property: Section 10. LIMITATIONS ON ADOPTION OF STATE LAW AND COLLEC- (1) The gross receipts from the sale of which have been subject to a TION OF USE TAXES. In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the transactions tax under any state-administered transactions and use tax Revenue and Taxation Code: ordinance. A. Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing (2) Purchased by operators of aircraft and used or consumed by such agency,the name of this District shall be substituted therefor. However,the operators directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common substitution shall not be made when: carriers of persons or property for hire or compensation under a certificate of (1) The word "State" is used as a part of the title of the State public convenience and necessity issued pursuant to the laws of this State, Controller, State Treasurer, State Board of Control,State Board of Equaliza- the United States,or any foreign government.This exemption is in addition to tion,State Treasury,or the Constitution of the State of California: the exemptions provided in Sections 6366 and 6366.1 of the Revenue and (2) The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by Taxation Code of the State of California. or against this District or any agency,officer,or employee thereof rather than (3) If the purchaser is obligated to purchase the property for a fixed by or against the State Board of Equalization, in performing the functions price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this incident to the administration or operation of this ordinance. ordinance. . (3) In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to,sec- (4) If the possession of, or the exercise of any right or power over, tions referring to the exterior boundaries of the State of California,where the the tangible personal property arises under a lease which is a continuing result of the substitution would be to: purchase of such property for any period of time for which the lessee is a. Provide an exemption from this lax with respect to certain sales, obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by a lease prior to the storage,use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would operative date of this ordinance. not otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales,storage,use or other (5) For the purposes of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, consumption remain subject to tax by the State under the provisions of Part 1 storage, use, or other consumption, or possession of, or exercise of any of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:or right or power over, tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the to tax by the state under the said provisions of that code. contract or lease upon notice,whether or not such right is exercised. (4) In Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), (6) Except as provided in subparagraph (7), a retailer engaged in 6711,6715,6737,6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. business in the District shall not be required to collect use tax from the purchaser B. The word"District" shall be substituted for the word "State"in the o1 tangible personal property, unless the retailer ships or delivers the property phrase"retailer engaged in business in this State"in Section 6203 and in the into the District or participates within the District in making the sale of the definition of that phrase in Section 6203. property, including, but not limited to, soliciting or receiving the order, either Section 11. EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS. directly or indirectly,at a place of business of the canvasser,solicitor,subsid A. There shall be excluded from the measure of The transactions tax and iary,or person in the District under the authority of the retailer. the use tax the amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of (7) "A retailer engaged in business in the District"shall also include any California or by any city,city and county,or county pursuant to the Bradley- retailer of any of the following:vehicles subject to registration pursuant to Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the amount of any state- Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, administered transactions or use tax. aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code,or B. There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transac- undocumented vessels registered under Chapter 2 of Division 3.5(commencing tions tax the gross receipts from: with Section 9850)of the Vehicle Code,That retailer shall be required to collect (1) Sales of tangible personal property to operators of aircraft to be use tax from any purchaser who registers or licenses the vehicle, vessel, or used or consumed principally outside the County in which the sale is made aircraft at an address in the District. and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of D. Any person subject to a use tax under this ordinance may credit against persons or property under the authority of the laws of this State,the United that tax any transactions tax or reimbursement for transactions tax paid to a States,or any foreign government. district imposing,or retailer liable for a transactions tax pursuant to Part 1.6 of (2) Sales of property to be used outside the District which is shipped Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code with respect to the sale to a point ouside the District,pursuant to the contract of sales,by delivery to to the person of the property the storage,use or other consumption of which is such point by the retailer or his agent,or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier subject to the use tax. for shipment to a consignee at such point. For the purposes of this para- Section 12. AMENDMENTS. All amendments subsequent to the effective graph,delivery to a point outside the District shaft be satisfied: date of this ordinance to Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code a. With respect to vehicles other than commercial vehicles subject relating to sales and use taxes and which are not inconsistent with Part 1.6 of to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code,and all amendments to Part 1.6 of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code,shall automatically become a part 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, and undocumented vessels registered of this ordinance:provided,however,that no such amendment shall operate so under Chapter 2 of Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9850) of the as to affect the rate of tax imposed by this ordinance. Vehicle Cade,by registration to an out of District address and by a declara- Section 13. TERMINATION OF TAXES. The taxes imposed by this ordi- tion under penalty of perjury.signed by the buyer, stating that such address wince shall remain in effect for not longer than 20 years but may be reimposed is,in fact,his principal place of residence:and with a majority vote of the County's electors. i b. With respect to commercial vehicles, by registration to a place Section 14. ENJOINING COLLECTION FORBIDDEN. No injunction or writ of of business out-of-District and declaration under penalty of perjury,signed by mandate or other court equitable process shall issue in any suit, action or the buyer,that the vehicle will be operated from thaat address. proceeding in any court against the State or the District,or against any officer of the seller is obligated to the State or the District,to prevent or enjoin the collection under this ordinance, (3) The sale of tangible personal property I furnish the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior a Part1.6 of of of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, of any tax or any to the operative date o1 this ordinance. atax required to be collected. (4) A lease of tangible personal property which is a continuing sale of Continued Next Page 49-60 .MEAS,UBE C, FULL TEXT(Continued) ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE C Section 15. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT. Subject to voter approval, the SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION annual appropriations limit of the District shall be$40 million. Section 16. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the The Sonoma Couaty-Agricultural Preservation and`Open Space District application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid,the remain- established in Measure A on this ballot provides the necessary structure to der of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or PRESERVE our AGRICULTURAL LANDS, retain our SCENIC VISTAS. PRO- circumstances shall not be affected thereby. TELT our AIR and WATER QUALITY and PREVENT URLIAN SPRAWL. To Section 17. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance relates to the levying and reach these vital and worthwhile goals,the District must nave the necessary collecting of the District transactions and use taxes and shall lake effect funds. immediately upon its adoption by District. We believe that Sonoma County residents are committed to keeping the PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County rural nature of our beautiful and scenic land.We also believe that our citizens Open Space Authority,State of California, on August 9.1990,by the follow- are willing to devote a small portion of their resources to achieve that goal. ing vote: This measure proposes that the residents of this county agree to tax DIRECTORS: themselves and the visitors to this county one quarter of one cent per dollar of ALYS:aye ANDERSON:absent COOKE:aye GILLEN:aye GOUIG:aye MERZ:aye taxable purchases made here. The funds thus raised will be used by the AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 ABSTAIN: 0 District to buy land, development rights and easements FROM WILLING WHEREUPON,the Chair declared the above and foregoing ordinance duty SELLERS in those areas already designated in the Sonoma County General adopted and Plan for priority protection-such as community separators. SO ORDERED. For every 100 DOLLARS of taxable purchases that residents and visitors 5/Charles Cooke make in the County,25 CENTS will be collected to protect and maintain the Attest: beauty and rural nature of our county. We believe that 25 CENTS is a small. s/Eeve T. Lewis Chairperson but meaningful and worthwhile investment to make to preserve the quality of life in Sonoma County. To keep Sonoma County the beautiful• productive and livable place that it is: VOTE YES for our future. IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY COUNTY COUNSEL s/Fred Kunde s/Allan Hemphill, President SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION Viticulturist/farmer Vinwood Cellars, Inc. MEASURE C s/Barbara Schneiders s/George Mertens Sierra Club Dairyman/Farmer Measure C requests voter approval of a one-quarter cent sates tax increase s/At Alys to fund the preservation of agricultural and other open-space lands as part of President&CEO the general plans of the County and the County's cities. Northbay Savings Bank California's land use planning laws require that every city and county have a general plan to guide the physical development of the community.Among other things, a general plan must have an open space element "for the comprehensive and long range preservation and conservation of open-space land." In 1989,the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted a new general plan whose open space element proposed the creation of an open space district to acquire, through purchase and donation, lands meeting certain open space criteria.This year,the Legislature authorized the creation of the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District for that purpose.The formation of the District requires voter approval and appears on this ballot as Measure A. To provide the District with funds, the Board of Supervisors created the Sonoma County Open Space Authority,which,subject to voter approval,may impose a sales and use tax. In August, the Authority adopted an ordinance that would impose a county-wide sales and use tax at the rate of 0.25 percent ($0.0025 per dollar)and requested an election for voter approval of the tax. The tax would be imposed for 20 years and is estimated to raise$271 million over that period. The Authority also adopted an expenditure plan that identifies categories of open-space lands that may be purchased from willing sellers.The expendi- ture plan is set forth above in the full text of Measure C.Neither the District nor the Authority has the power of eminent domain. That is, a land owner cannot be compelled to sell land or easements for open-space preservation. Categories of open-space land that may be purchased include, but are not limited to, community separators, scenic landscape units and scenic corri- dors,critical habitat areas,and riparian corridors.Revenue raised by the tax is not "earmarked" for any specific project, and may be spent for any purpose identified in the expenditure plan. NO ARGUMENT AGAINST THIS MEASURE Other duties of the Authority include assuring that open-space acquisitions meet the requirements of city or County general plans and periodically WAS SUBMITTED auditing the District's activities. The California Constitution requires that a spending limit be established for the Authority.The Authority would be prohibited from spending tax money in excess of that limit, as adjusted according to law, without additional voter approval. Measure C would set the Authority's annual spending limit at $40 million. s/James P. Botz County Counsel 49-61 LAND TRUST ALLIA N C E Summer 1991 LAND TRUST FACTS Land trusts are local, regional, or statewide nonprofit conservation organizations directly involved in helping protect natural, scenic, recreational, agricultural, historic, or cultural property. Land trusts work to preserve open land that is important to the communities and regions where they operate. Land trusts respond rapidly to conservation needs and operate in cities, rural, and suburban areas. Land Trust Accomplishments Collectively, America's nearly 900 independent land trusts have helped protect 2.7 million acres. Land trusts own 437,000 acres; hold conservation easements on another 450,000 acres; have acquired, protected, and transferred 668,000 acres to other organizations and agencies; and have used other direct methods to help protect another 1,159,000 acres. Well known areas protected by land trusts include land on the California coast at Big Sur; in the San Juan Islands, Washington State; at Jackson Hole, Wyoming; along the Appalachian Trail; in New York's Adirondacks; and at Acadia National Park in Maine. Land trusts now operate in every state in the nation protecting land of local, regional, and national importance. Land Trust Operations Land trusts vary greatly in size. Over half are completely volunteer, others have only a director or one or more part-time staff members, a few have a large staff, prominent board of directors and a large membership. Annual budgets range from under $10,000 to over $1 million. Thirty-two percent operate with budgets of $100,000 or more. Eighty-four percent of all land trusts accept land donations; seventy-five percent accept conservation easements. In both instances donors can receive significant tax benefits based on the value of the donated land or easement. Sixty-three percent of land trusts buy land for conservation. Seventy percent of the funds for purchases come from contributions from members and individual donors in the community. Other funds come from government agencies, foundations, and corporations. Land trusts also borrow money from banks, foundations, and individuals to buy land. Loans are repaid either through fund raising, sales to conservation buyers or, in the case of advance acquisitions for local, state or federal conservation agencies, when public funds are available and the property is repurchased by the government. Although independent, land trusts frequently work with each other, with national conservation organizations, and with government agencies on important projects. 1319F STREET NW SUITE 501 WASHINGTON, DC 200041106 202.638-4725 FAX 202-638.4730 k.-_ i c t Land Trust Growth In 1950 there were 53 trusts in 26 states; 132 by 1965. During the next decade the number doubled, passing the 300 mark by 1975. By 1980 the number was 429. By the end of 1990 the number of land trusts soared to 889 with a combined membership of over 750,000. Today, land trusts operate in all 50 states, the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. The greatest growth in recent years has been on the west coast, the northeast, and the mid-Atlantic region. California has the highest number of trusts in the west, 76. Massachusetts with 116 has the highest number in the northeast, followed by Connecticut with 114 and New York with 59. Pennsylvania leads the mid-Atlantic with 38 followed by Maryland with 34 land trusts. Land Trust History In the mid-1800's many "village improvement societies" formed in New England to "improve the quality of life and of the environment." These small nonprofit organizations were the forerunners of today's land trust movement. A few years later, in 1891, the Massachusetts legislature incorporated The Trustees of Reservations to protect the "jewels of the living landscape." The Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, with similar purposes, was formed in 1901. Today, both organizations are among the nation's leading state conservation groups. Not all the pioneers were in the northeast. At the turn of the century, a group of Californians organized the Sempervirens Club with the slogan "Save the Redwoods." Other organizations that operated in part like land trusts include the Cincinnati Museum of Natural History, founded in 1800; the Maine Audubon Society, founded in 1843; and the Ohio Historical Society, formed in 1885 to preserve the state's historical and archeological sites. The Land Trust Alliance In 1982 four of the nation's leading land trusts established the Land Trust Alliance (initially called the Land Trust Exchange) to increase the effectiveness of the many diverse, independent, and geographically widespread land trusts. Today, local, regional and state groups from Hawaii to Puerto Rico are members of the Alliance, which has grown to become the national umbrella group for the land trust movement. The Alliance not only provides a broad range of services from insurance to training aimed at helping to strengthen individual land trusts, but also acts as the voice for land trusts in Washington. The Alliance focuses on public policy issues of direct interest to land trusts, playing both an educational and an advocacy role. The Alliance publishes "Exchange," the only professional journal for land trusts and serves as an information source about land trusts for journalists and the public. With Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, the Alliance established in 1990 the Land Conservation Law Institute to provide legal information to land trusts and attorneys. The Alliance also organizes the national land trust Rally every 18 months, now the largest land conservation conference in North America. The Land Trust Alliance is a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) organization with offices in Washington, D.C. Policies are established by an elected volunteer Board of Directors. . aa LAND TRUST ALLIANCE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS What is a Conservation Easement? Who Can Gant an Easement?To Whom Can A conservation easement is a legal agreement a property They Grant It? owner makes to restrict the type and amount of development Any owner of property with conservation or historic that may take place on his or her property.Each easement's resources may grant an easement.If the property belongs to restrictions are tailored to the particular property and to the more than one person,all owners must consent to granting an interests of the individual owner, easement.If the property is mortgaged,the owner must obtain To understand the easement concept, think of owning an agreement from the lender to subordinate its interests to land as holding a bundle of rights.A landowner may sell or those of the easement holder so that the easement cannot be give away the whole bundle or just one or two of those extinguished ni the event of foreclosure. rights.These may include,for example,the right to construct If an easement donor wishes to claim tax benefits for the buildings, to subdivide the land, to restrict access, or to gift,he or she must mate it or sell it for less than fair market harvest timber.To give away certain rights while retaining value to a public agency or to a conservation or historic others,a property owner grants an easement to an appropriate preservation organization that qualifies as a public charity third party,such as a land trust,a public agency,or a historic under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3). Most land preservation organization. trusts and historic preservation organizations meet this Easements often are called by different names,according criterion. to the resource they protect.Easements used to preserve an Holding an easement, however, is a great respon- agricultural operation,for example are termed agricultural or sibility.A property owner should make sure that the recipient agricultural preservation easements.When the resources are organization has the time and resources to carry out that primarily scenic,easements can bear that name.Another term responsibility.An organization that accepts the donation of for a conservation easement is conservation restric- an easement typically will ask the owner to make a contribu- tion.Whatever they are called,the concept is the same. tion toward the costs of monitoring the easement in perpetuity An easement runs with the land—that is, the original or will establish a monitoring fund from other sources. owner and all subsequent owners are bound by the restrictions of the easement.The easement is recorded at the county or How Restrictive is an Easement? town records office so that all future owners and lenders will learn about the restrictions when they obtain title reports. An easement restricts development to the degree that is necessary to protect the significant values of that property. Why Grant a Conservation Easement? Sometimes this totally prohibits construction,sometimes it doesn't. People grant conservation easements to protect their land If the goal is to preserve a pristine natural area, for or historic buildings from inappropriate development while example,an easement may prohibit all construction,as well retaining private ownership. By granting an easement in as activities that would alter the land's present natural condi- perpetuity,the owner may be assured that the resource values tion.If the goal is to protect farm or ranch land,however,an of his or her property will be protected indefinitely,no matter easement may restrict subdivision and development while who the future owners are. Granting an easement can also allowing for structures and activities necessary for and com- yield tax savings,as discussed below. patible with the agricultural operation.Even the most restric- tive easements typically permit landowners to continue What Kind of Properly Can Be Protected by an traditional uses of the land. Easement? Must an Easement Allow Public Access? Any property with significant conservation or historic preservation values can be protected by an easement. This Landowners who grant conservation easements general- includes forests, wetlands, farms and ranches, endangered ly make their own choice about whether to open their property species habitat, beaches, scenic areas, historic areas, and to the public.Some landowners convey certain public access more. Land conservation and historic preservation profes- rights,such as allowing fishing or hiking in specified loca- sionals can help landowners evaluate the relative features of tions or permitting guided tours once a month.Others do not. their property. 1319 F STREET NW SUITE 501 WASRINGTON, DC 20004.1106 202-638-4725 FAX 202-638.4730 If an income tax deduction is to be claimed,however, How Can Granting an Easement Reduce a some types of easements require access. If the easement is Property Owner's Estate Tax? given for recreation or educational purposes,public access is required.For scenic easements,much of the property must be Many heirs to large historic estates and to large tracts of visible to the public,but physical access is not necessary. open space—forms and ranches in particular—face monumen- Access is generally not required for easements that protect tat estate taxes.Even if the heirs wish to keep their property wildlife or plant habitat or agricultural lands. in the existing condition,federal estate tax is levied not on the value of the property for its existing use,but on its fair market Wt'lat Are the Grantee's Responsibilities? value,usually the amount a developer or speculator would The grantee organization or agency is responsible for pay.The resulting estate tax can be so high that the heirs must enforcingthe restrictions that the easement document spells sell the property to pay the taxes. � A conservation easement, however, often can reduce out.To do this,the grantee monitors the property on a regular estate taxes If the property owner has restricted the property basis,typically once a year.Grantee representatives visit the by a perpetual conservation easement before his or her death, restricted property,usually accompanied by the owner.They the property must be valued in the estate at its restricted value. determine whether the property remains in the condition To the extent that the restricted value is lower than the prescribed by the easement and documented at the time of the unrestricted value,the value of the estate will be less,and the grant.The grantee maintains written records of the monitor- estate will thus be subject to a lower estate tax. ing visits.The visits also keep the grantee and the property Even if a property owner does not want to restrict the owner in touch. property during his or her lifetime,the owner can still specify If a monitoring visit reveals that the easement has been in his or her will that a charitable gift of a conservation violated,the grantee has the legal right to require the owner easement be made to a qualifying organization upon the to correct the violation and restore the property to its condi- owner's death.Assuming that the easement is properly struc- tion prior to the violation. tured,the value of the easement gift will be deducted from How Can Donating an Easement Reduce a the estate,reducing the value on which estate taxes are levied. Property O�nner's Income TaX? Again,a lower tax results. The donation of a conservation easement is a tax-deduct- Can Granting an Easement Reduce an Owner's ible charitable gift,provided that the easement is perpetual Property Tax: and is donated"exclusively for conservation purposes"to a Property tax assessment usually is based on the qualified conservation organization or public agency.Inter- property smarket value, which reflects the property's nal Revenue Code 170(h) generally defines "conservation development potential. If a conservation easement reduces purposes"to include the following: the development potential of the property,it may reduce the • the preservation of land areas for outdoor recreation level of assessment and the amount of the owner's property by,or the education of,the general public taxes • the protection of relatively natural habitats of fish, The actual amount of reduction,if any,depends on many wildlife,or plants,or similar ecosystems factors.State law and the personal attitudes of local officials • the preservation of open space—including farmland and assessors may influence or determine the decision to and forest land—for scenic enjoyment or pursuant to award property tax relief to easement grantors. an adopted governmental conservation policy;in either case,such open space preservation must yield Who Has Granted Conservation Easements on a significant public benefit their Land? • the preservation of historically important land areas or buildings. Nationwide,concerned landowners have granted ease- To determine the value of the easement donation, the ments on some two million acres of land.People who grant owner has the property appraised both at its fair market value easements share a desire to permanently protect and enhance without the easement restrictions and at its fair market value the natural,scenic,and cultural resources of the community. with the easement restrictions.The difference between these The Land Trust Alliance can put you in touch with your local two appraised values is the tax deductible easement value. land trust. Detailed federal regulations govern these appraisals. Taken from The Conservation Easement Handbook, available from the Land Trust Alliance, 1319 F Street NW,Suite 501,Washington,DC 20004-1106.(202) 638- 4725. y ',l .u� 3 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR C 0 N T R A C O S T A C 0 U N T Y �, ,� Administration Building 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor Martinez, California 94553 DATE: March 9, 1994 TO: Harvey Bragdon, Co u ity Development Director FROM: Claude L. Van Mart sistant County Administrator SUBJECT: FOLLOW-UP TO RE ORT FROM THE INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURAL ISSUES, PERMITTED USES IN A-20 AND A-40 ZONING AND LARGE LOT REZONING Attached for your information is a copy of the report from the Internal Operations Committee on this subject which the Board of Supervisors approved on March 8, 1994, except for Recommendation #3 which was not acted on and is to be brought back to the Board at a future date. Please note that several of the recommendations will require some additional work from you or members of your staff, as follows: 4. ACCEPT the attached staff memorandum report on the Agricultural Soils Trust Fund and direct staff from the Community Development Department to report to the Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on the structure and function of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund. 5 . DIRECT staff from the Community Development Department to report to the Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on those actions which are necessary in order to accomplish a change which would allow "permitted uses" in A-20 zoning to also be "permitted uses" in A-40 zoning and to comment on whether such a change would be consistent with the General Plan, as the Board directed on January 25, 1994 . 6 . DIRECT the Community Development Director to report to our Committee on March 28, 1994 on staff's review, analysis and comments on the papers submitted by the Mt. Diablo Audubon Society, the Citizens Land Alliance and any other agencies or individuals on the subject of large lot rezoning, as was directed by the Board on January 11, 1994. -2- We have scheduled a report back to the Internal Operations Committee on this subject as follows: Monday, March 28, 1994 9 :00 A.M. Room 105, County Administration Building Please forward seven copies of your written report on this subject to my attention by Wednesday, March 23, 1994, so we can include it in the Committee's packet. CLVM:amb van3-10-94 Attachment cc: Dennis Barry, Community Development Department Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Mark Hughes, Assistant to Supervisor Jeff Smith TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I.O.-S FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE / Costa DATE: February 28, 1994 � `- ou' ty SUBJECT: ABILITY TO ALLOW "CLUSTERING" OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS ON PARCELS AT MORE THAN ONE DWELLING PER 40 ACRES AND ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AGRICULTURAL SOILS TRUST FUND SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)8 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. CONCLUDE that it is currently possible to allow clustering at one residential dwelling per 40 acres through the use of the administrative variance procedure, as is outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 2. CONCLUDE that a General Plan amendment would be necessary to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core in order to permit "clustering" of residential dwellings at no more than one per ten acres, with a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights, as is .outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 3. DETERMINE whether to authorize a General Plan study in order to change the density allowable in the Agricultural Core in order to permit "clustering" of residential dwellings at no more than one per ten acres, with a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights, as is outlined in the attached staff memorandum. 4. ACCEPT the attached staff memorandum report on the Agricultural Soils Trust Fund and direct staff from the Community Development Department to report to the Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on the structure and function of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund. R CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE -OTHER SIGNATURE(S): &EFF SMITH 6HMTE WRIGHT--McPEAR ACTION OF BOARD ON Mareh 81994 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED__ OTHER- VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF CC: See Page 3 SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY T.O.-5 5. DIRECT staff from the Community Development Department to report to the Internal Operations Committee on March 28, 1994 on those actions which are necessary in order to modify the provisions of the A-40 zoning to enhance the economic viability of agriculture and to comment on whether such a change would be consistent with the General Plan, as the Board directed on January 25, 1994. 6. DIRECT the Community Development Director to report to our Committee on March 28, 1994 on staff's review, analysis and comments on the papers submitted by the Mt. Diablo Audubon Society, the Citizens Land Alliance and any other agencies or individuals on the subject of large lot rezoning, as was directed by the Board on January 11, 1994. BACKGROUND: on January 11, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to report to the Internal Operations Committee at its second meeting in February on his comments and recommendations regarding the papers submitted by the Audubon Society and Citizens Land Alliance. The Community Development Director has requested an additional 30 days in which to complete this report and we are recommending that this extension of time be agreed to. on January 25, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to develop a mechanism for the implementation of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund which could be used to purchase future development rights on prime agricultural land, to be funded in part by the $1 agricultural mitigation fee at the Keller Canyon Landfill. In addition, on January 25, 1994, the Board directed the Community Development Director to report to the Internal Operations Committee on the development of, a program for clustering of multiple residences on a 40 acre parcel including no more than one residence for each ten acres, utilizing a common-interest development concept for a parcel where the residences could be clustered in close proximity to each other and the balance of the land could be utilized in an economically viable manner for agriculture. Under this concept, it might be possible for individual residences to be individually owned and for the remaining agricultural land to be owned in common. This would include a permanent dedication of all potential future development rights. on February 28, 1994, our Committee considered each of these referrals. We are recommending that the Community Development Director be provided an additional 30 days in which to report on the large lot rezoning issue. on February 28, 1994, our Committee received and considered the attached report from Dennis Barry on the "clustering" concept. It is clear from this report that clustering is possible at no more than one residential dwelling per 40 acres (plus, in some cases, a second residential dwelling and a dwelling for farm worker housing with a land use permit). This report also notes.the problems with clustering at one residential unit per 10 acres and the need for a General Plan amendment in order to make this type of clustering a reality. We are asking that the Board of Supervisors determine whether to go to the expense and time involved in authorizing a General Plan amendment and CEQA review on this proposal, which might result in a potential for an additional 300 to 400 units in the agricultural core of the County. On February 28, 1994, our Committee also received and considered the attached staff report on the development of an Agricultural Soils Trust Fund. Of the options suggested in the staff report, our Committee believes that it is important that the Board of Supervisors utilize an advisory committee of some sort which could provide broad input and advice to the Board of Supervisors on the purchase of development rights. Staff have indicated that they -2- I/ I.O.-5 will be prepared to return to our Committee on March 28, 1994 with further details on how such a Trust Fund could be developed and implemented. We think that it may be more important at this time to get this Trust Fund in place than it is to undertake the General Plan amendment necessary to implement the "clustering" concept at one unit per 10 acre density. Finally, the Board of Supervisors, on January 25, 1994, directed staff from the Community Development Department to report on those actions which are necessary in order to accomplish enhanced economic viability for agriculture, including a change which would allow "permitted uses" in A-20 zoning to also be "permitted uses" In A-40 zoning and to comment on whether such a change would be consistent with the General Plan. We are suggesting that this report be made to our Committee on March 28, 1994. Following our Committee's consideration of all of these reports on March 28, 1994 our Committee will be prepared to make additional reports to the Board of Supervisors on these referrals. cc: County Administrator Val Alexeeff, Director Growth Management and Economic Development Agency Harvey Bragdon, Community Development Director Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Dennis Barry, Community Development Department Jim Cutler, Community Development Department -3-