Friday, February 23 , 2018, 10:31 am | Fair 53º

 
 
 
 

Peter Adam: With Gaviota Plan, Radical County Supervisors Again Ignore Peoples’ Wishes

It’s déjà vu all over again.

Supervisor Peter Adam
Supervisor Peter Adam

Two weeks ago, an oil company sought planning permission to drill new wells just south of Orcutt. The Santa Barbara County Planning Commission had given the green light for a project that would bring jobs to our area and pour badly needed tax revenue into the county’s General Fund. The Board of Supervisors rejected the findings of its Planning Commission and voted 3-2 to impose crippling air-quality restrictions.

At its last meeting, the same 3-2 board majority voted to advance a Community Plan for the Gaviota coast toward adoption.

So what, then, is the common thread that makes these two decisions alike? Why is it déjà vu all over again?

With both the Santa Maria Energy project and the Gaviota plan, the folks who live and work in the area and who would be most directly affected by the projects came in to testify and make their wishes known. And in both cases, they were ignored.

The board majority not only ignored the people most affected, they also ignored the advice of its own advisory commissions.

With the Santa Maria Energy project, the Planning Commission selected a mitigation standard for greenhouse gas emissions that exceeded the requirements of California law. The board rejected that advice and voted for an even tougher requirement. With the Gaviota plan, the board majority bulldozed over its own citizens drafting committee and the Agricultural Advisory Committee.

Why is this board majority doing this? Is it the north-south divide that has been well understood for the last 40 years? Or is something else going on? My view is that it’s more than the difference in political coloration between north and south.

We have three supervisors who are significantly more radical than their own constituencies. They share an elitist set of attitudes that makes them comfortable enacting command and control regulatory requirements.

Social engineering is a way of life with them. They have no qualms about coming out to the colonies to tell the folks who own and work the land what they will be allowed to do with it.

They seek to stifle economic development against the will of the governed and against the best interests of the county itself. These three align with the enviro-socialists, self-identified "stakeholders" who would like to impose extreme and unreasonable restrictions on property. Deep down, they do not believe in the basic tenet of private property in the first place, and they use whatever means they can to diminish the value of private property and the generation of wealth. My colleagues in the majority are only too willing to help move forward this radical agenda.

What is common to both Santa Maria Energy and Gaviota is that we have more devaluation of private property and more control and limitation on wealth creation. This is economically suicidal behavior.

Interestingly, the public testimony in both cases was roughly 2-to-1 in opposition to what the South Coast majority ended up voting for. This kind of “tin ear” to the needs and rights of those affected by their decisions demonstrates how out of touch our South Coast supervisors have become. We would like to see folks on the South Coast elect representatives who reflect the needs of the whole county.

Peter Adam represents the Fourth District on the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click here to get started >

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.



Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >