|
View
Current Signatures - Sign the
Petition
To: All San Mateo County Residents
PROJECT DISCRIPTION: Mid-peninsula Regional Open Space District Draft
Service Plan For San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Area: “The act of
annexation is a legal and administrative change to the District’s boundary and
does not itself produce an environmental effect.. The District Board and staff
chose to have an Environmental Impact Report prepared to ensure a very thorough
analysis of potential environmental issues and public concerns raised during
the scooping process. The annexation of the San Mateo County coast, adoption of
the Service Plan, adoption of an annexation policy for the Coastal Annexation
Area, and an adoption of a willing sellers only ordinance is the proposed
project.”(MROSD doc R-02-82, Meeting 02-12, June 12,02)
California Environmental Quality Act “CEQA”
· “The foremost principle under CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act
to be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection
to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.”
· “It’s purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the
environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus , the
EIR protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.”
· “The core of an EIR is the mitigation and alternative sections. The
Legislature has declared it the policy of the State to “consider alternatives
to proposed actions affecting the environment.”
· “The purpose of an EIR is ....to list ways in which the significant effects
of such a project might be minimized; and to indicate alternatives to such a
project.”
· “....the Legislature has decreed that local agencies shall be guided by the
doctrine of feasibility. It is the policy of the state that public agencies
should NOT approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives ...“
· “CEQA Guidelines, which state that EIR must describe a range of reasonable
alternatives to a project, or to the location of a project, which could
feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, and evaluate the
comparative merits of the alternatives.”
· “As the underscored language suggests, project alternatives typically fall
into one of two categories; on-site alternatives, which generally consist of
different uses of the land under consideration; and off-site alternatives,
which usually involve similar uses at different locations.”
· “Each case must be evaluated on its facts, which in turn must be reviewed in
light of statutory purpose. Informed by that purpose we here affirm the
principle that an EIR for any project subject to CEQA review must consider a
reasonable range of alternatives to the project or the location of the project
which (1) offer substantial environmental advantage over the project proposal,
and (2) may be “feasibly accomplished in a successful manner” considering the
economic, environmental, social and technological factors involved”
CEQA Requires Due Diligence Review of the Findings of Fact
The Mid-Peninsula Open Space District, as quoted above, is proposing a legal
annexation of the coastal area of San Mateo County. They have drafted a
“conceptual” Service Plan that only describes the “conceptual purposes and
goals” of their coastal annexation proposal while listing the obvious
environmental risks and conceptual mitigation schemes. CEQA requires that MROSD
must first develop and adopt a real Coordinated Resource Management Plan aka
CRMP for their San Mateo County Coastal Annexation proposal before being
reviewed under CEQA. The standard of review under CEQA is that the “Preferred
Alternative” is selected after a due diligence review of the “Findings of Fact”
regarding environmental impacts. It is impossible to have a “Finding of Fact”
for a hypothesis or conceptual plan. CEQA requires: “Each case must be
evaluated on its facts, which in turn must be reviewed in light of statutory
purpose. Informed by that purpose, we here affirm the principle that an EIR for
any project subject to CEQA review must consider a reasonable range of
alternatives to the project or the location of the project which (1) offer
substantial environmental advantage over the project proposal, and (2) may be
“feasibly accomplished in a successful manner considering the economic,
environmental, social and technological factors involved”.
Findings of Fact Regarding the San Mateo Coastal Rural Watershed
Long years without a major wildfire have allowed a serious buildup of biomass
that could, according to the California State Auditor’s SFPUC February 2000
Report, fuel a catastrophic firestorm in a region that lacks a rapid fire
response capability enjoyed by most inner-city fire departments. A major
wildfire driven by blazing hot Diablo winds could explode over and beyond the
eastern facing slopes above the Hetch Hetchy reservoirs only to be stopped at
our coastal waters edge after stripping the groundcover of its ability to hold
back soil and long hidden pollutants when the heavy rains come. The last major
wildfire in this SMC RCZ watershed occurred in 1946 which resulted in reduced
capacity of the reservoirs because of the vast sedimentation that followed the
fires. The GGNRA Fire Management Plan records describe the damaging 1946
wildland fire as having lasted for six weeks, completely burning down the small
coastal community of Montara. The Half Moon Bay Fire Protection District
alerted SMC RCZ coastal communities in 2002 that all the conditions that caused
the disastrous 1946 wildfires currently exist in our coastal watershed.
Unfettered public access, high temperatures, blazing hot winds, steep hills,
excessive wildland vegetation, drought affected plants, narrow roads, slow
wildland fire detection and densely populated wildland /urban interface (WUI)
area neighborhoods all contribute to firestorms.
Coastside Fire Safe Council Findings of Fact
MROSD states in their 2001/2002 annual report that they spent 1% of their
revenues for resource management and annexation (approximately $280,000). MRSOD
has NO adopted CRMP for their current 46,000 acres holdings and all resource
management is conducted under adopted “policies”. NO CRMP for their Coastal
Annexation Proposal. NO Experience in managing Rural Lands Communities. No
funding scheme or streams to support their Annexation concept. NO CEQA required
standard of review adopted findings of fact for their conceptual Service Plan.
The Board of Directors for the Half Moon Bay Coastside Fire Safe Council have
adopted the above findings of fact and has declared the NO ANNEXATION
ALTERNATIVE as the most protective and least environmentally damaging to our
coastal communities. Please help Protect California Future by signing this
petition for the CEQA mandated PREFERRED NO MROSD COASTAL ANNEXATION
ALTERNATIVE.
Sincerely,
The PREFERRED NO MROSD COASTAL ANNEXATION ALTERNATIVE Petition to
All San Mateo County Residents was created by Half Moon Bay Coastside Fire Safe Council and written by Half Moon Bay Coastside Fire Safe Council.
This petition is hosted here at http://www.petitiononline.com/petition.html
as a public service. There is no express or implied endorsement of this
petition by Artifice, Inc. or our sponsors. The petition scripts are created by
Mike Wheeler at Artifice,
Inc. For Technical Support please use our simple Petition
Help form.
Send Petition to a Friend
- Start a Petition - Contributions - Privacy - Advertising - Comments and Suggestions
PetitionOnline - DesignCommunity - 3D Designers - Gallery - Architecture - Scrapbook - 3D Developers - Games - Search |
|
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/nomrosd/petition.html |
© 1999-2002 Artifice, Inc. - All Rights Reserved. |