What Characteristics Should Santa Cruz’s Next Police Chief Have?

The City of Santa Cruz is in the midst of selecting its next police chief and wants the community to weigh in on the process.

Santa Cruz Police Chief Andy Mills moved departments last October, trading in Santa Cruz for Palm Springs. Now, as the City searches for its next chief, it wants to know the characteristics and priorities Santa Cruz’s next leader should possess.

The City established a survey concerning the new chief hiring at: cityofsantacruz.com/COPselect

The survey will close on March 24.

Santa Cruz Police Department Deputy Chief Bernie Escalante has served as the Interim Chief since Oct. 30.

A Santa Cruz native, Escalante is a 25-year veteran of the Santa Cruz Police Department, having started his career as a community service officer in 1996. He was appointed to the rank of Deputy Chief in February 2020.

‘A Force of Nature’: Land Conservation Pioneer Diane Porter Cooley Dies

Diane Porter Cooley’s family history dates back to Santa Cruz County’s infancy. Her conservation efforts of both farmland and forest helped build the underpinnings of the county’s environmental ideology and reshape the way the nation viewed agricultural land protection. Cooley died Thursday in her Pajaro Valley home at the age of 93.

“She was an incredibly joyous, powerful, extraordinary force of nature,” says her daughter Anne Youngblood. “And nobody would argue that.”

Cooley harbored a deep and abiding love for the Pajaro Valley and its history, along with an appreciation that agricultural land should be preserved as working land. That belief inspired her to donate her family property—the Circle P Ranch—to the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County in 2001 as a conservation easement.

That move ended up setting a standard nationwide in the way communities save their agricultural land from development while keeping it as working land. It was made all the more impressive by the fact that Cooley first had to assuage the concerns of a skeptical community, says Land Trust Executive Director Sarah Newkirk.

“She had an undeniably transformational impact on the Land Trust,” Newkirk said. “That transformed our entire business model.”

Those efforts, Newkirk says, made Cooley an “ambassador” of sorts.

“She was able to assure them that working hand-in-hand with the conservation community was not risky, that it had benefits for both wildlife and people,” she said. “It transformed the land trust movement throughout the United States.”

Youngblood says that Cooley’s great-grandfather John T. Porter came to the area in 1850, just one year shy of being considered a pioneer. He nevertheless made his mark, becoming at 22 the youngest sheriff in Santa Cruz County history. He was also appointed as Monterey County Customs Officer by President Abraham Lincoln.

More importantly, he also became an owner of vast quantities of land, she says, setting the stage for the family’s legacy.

Cooley’s father, Tom, was a founder of Driscoll’s Berries.

For her part, Cooley helped found the Elkhorn Slough Foundation and the Pajaro Valley Arts Council. She was also involved with Community Foundation Santa Cruz County, the UC Santa Cruz Arboretum, the Santa Cruz Symphony, the Cabrillo Festival of Contemporary Music and Second Harvest Food Bank.

She was also part of the Agricultural History Project and the Santa Cruz County Fairgrounds Foundation/Rogers House.

Cooley also led Youngblood’s Girl Scout troop, creating an environmental merit badge and leading outdoor excursions that included trail building and creek cleanups.

Local Historian Sandy Lydon, who sat with Cooley on the Citizens’ Advisory Committee of Nisene Marks State Park in the 1960s, says that “a light has gone out.”

“She was a pistol,” Lydon said. “I can’t imagine this place without her. She brought perspective. For historians, she was the glue that held everything together.”

Lydon says that Cooley worked efficiently with numerous political factions throughout the county.

“She was a link to the past,” he said. “She paid so much attention to the history of her family. And she remembered everything. She had a bear trap of a memory.”

Born on Oct. 15, 1928, in Oakland and raised on Los Lomas Ranch, Cooley graduated from Watsonville High School in 1946 and attended Stanford University, where she earned degrees in political science and economics.

That’s where she met her future husband, Don Cooley, with a marriage that lasted seven decades. The couple had two children, Anne and Steven.

She was named Woman of the Year by Congressman Sam Farr in 1988, and 10 years later was named Farmer of the Year by the Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau.

She earned the UCSC Fiat Lux Award in 2013 along with her husband.

Former Watsonville Senior Analyst Doug Mattos says he enjoyed conversing with Cooley.

“Every conversation would turn into a great story, and she loved to share something new about the Pajaro Valley and beyond,” he said.

Longtime friend and Santa Cruz County Fair Boardmember Loretta Estrada describes Cooley as “one of the most intelligent people I’ve ever known.”

“If she ever told a story, you could tell she was so knowledgeable about so many things, especially about the Pajaro Valley,” Estrada said. “What she had to say was very important.”

Estrada says she remembers Cooley sporting fancy western wear at local events.

“(She) had so much pride in her western heritage,” Estrada said. “I think she was still riding her horse at 90 years old.”

Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency Board Chair Amy Newell first encountered Cooley during the formation of Action Pajaro Valley when the community was embroiled with setting urban growth rules—now known as Measure U—that protect farmland.

“She never hesitated to speak her mind, not worrying about political correctness,” Newell said. “She was funny and had a good sense of humor.”

Watsonville/Aptos/Santa Cruz Adult School Director Nancy Bilicich says that Cooley was “an extraordinary woman who was extremely strong.” Cooley’s input during a recent evaluation helped the school obtain its six-year accreditation from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.

“She never hesitated to give her opinion and justify her thoughts,” she said. “She had a heart of gold.”

Above all, Youngblood says, it was Cooley’s relationship with her friends and family that brought her the most joy.

“She had one of the most vast networks of family and friends I have ever witnessed,” she said. “I don’t know how I was so lucky to have Diane Porter Cooley as a mother.”

House Passes $1.5 Trillion Spending Bill as Democrats Drop COVID Aid

By Emily Cochrane, The New York Times

The House on Wednesday passed a sprawling $1.5 trillion federal spending bill that includes a huge infusion of aid for war-torn Ukraine and money to keep the government funded through September, after jettisoning a package to fund President Joe Biden’s new COVID-19 response effort.

Bipartisan approval of the first major government spending legislation of Biden’s presidency marked the first time since he took office that Democrats were able to use their congressional majorities and control of the White House to set funding levels for their priorities, including climate resilience, public education and child care.

But the exclusion of the $15.6 billion pandemic aid package, amid disputes about its cost that threatened to derail the broader legislation, infuriated the White House and frustrated Democratic leaders, leaving the fate of the Biden administration’s coronavirus strategy uncertain.

The president’s team has said it is in urgent need of funding for testing, therapeutics, vaccines and efforts to stop new variants. Officials had initially suggested they needed as much as $30 billion before requesting $22.5 billion, an amount that got whittled down in negotiations with Republicans, who resisted spending any new federal money on the pandemic.

In response, top Democrats had agreed to take the funding from existing programs, including $7 billion set aside under last year’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus aid law to help state governments. But that approach drew a backlash from many Democrats and governors in both parties, outraged at the idea of clawing back assistance that states had been counting on.

Not long after the 2,700-page spending bill was released early Wednesday and just hours before a scheduled vote, a number of Democrats privately registered their dismay with party leaders, raising the prospect that the entire package could collapse for lack of support. The dispute froze activity on the floor for hours as top Democrats rushed to salvage the spending measure.

By midafternoon, Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California notified Democrats in a brief letter that the coronavirus money would be dropped.

“It is heartbreaking to remove the COVID funding, and we must continue to fight for urgently needed COVID assistance, but unfortunately that will not be included in this bill,” Pelosi wrote.

The episode underscored the deep and persistent political divides over the pandemic, and the federal government’s role in responding to it. But it also demonstrated that as infections and deaths subside, COVID-19 is no longer the dominant priority in Washington.

Instead, the spending measure was fueled in large part by strong bipartisan support for a $13.6 billion aid package to help Ukraine as it endures a brutal invasion by Russia, and by the determination of Democrats to finally see their funding priorities enshrined in law more than a year after Biden took office.

In addition to adding billions of dollars to the federal budget, the sprawling spending bill achieves a number of Democratic priorities, including long-awaited reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and clarifying that federal regulatory jurisdiction extends to vaping and synthetic tobacco.

“For the first time in a long time, I believe we show just how government can work for working people once again and to achieve the betterment of humankind,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., chair of the House Appropriations Committee.

Lawmakers more than doubled what the Biden administration requested in emergency aid for Ukraine, sending about $6.5 billion to the Pentagon for military assistance and about $6.7 billion in humanitarian and economic aid to help both refugees and those who remained in the country.

Overall, the measure would significantly increase federal spending, setting aside $730 billion for domestic programs and $782 billion for the military. Democrats hailed a $46 billion increase in domestic spending, which they said was the largest in four years. And Republicans crowed that they had resisted a liberal push to reduce Pentagon spending and maintained a number of longtime policy provisions, like the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for most abortions.

The House passed the measure in two pieces, allowing members of each party to support the initiatives they favored. The military and homeland security spending passed 361-69, while the domestic spending passed 260-171, with one lawmaker, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., voting present. The bill now goes to the Senate.

“This compromise is not the bill that Republicans would have written on our own,” Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, said in a statement. “But I am proud of the major concessions we have extracted from this all-Democrat government.”

The military spending reflects priorities Biden mentioned in his State of the Union address, such as increased funding to help Ukraine and bolster the defense of the Baltic States. Billions of dollars for long-term goals of building additional ships and aircraft would be funded, including 13 new Navy vessels, a dozen F/A-18 Super Hornets and 85 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

The bill would also provide $5 million for what it calls “ex gratia” payments to the survivors of the Aug. 29 drone strike on a family in Kabul, Afghanistan, which the Pentagon admitted was a mistake that killed 10 civilians, including seven children, after an investigation by The New York Times.

It also would provide a 2.7% pay raise for all 2.1 million uniformed service members as well as the approximately 750,000 civilian employees of the Defense Department, and includes nearly $400 million more than Biden had requested to increase housing and food subsidies for military families in response to rising prices.

A House summary said the bill would provide more than $1.6 billion to promote a “free and open Indo-Pacific” and to counter the growing influence of the Chinese government in “developing countries,” as the Biden administration seeks to check China’s growing power.

Democrats also won increases for domestic programs they have long championed, such as school grants, the Head Start program, Pell grants and efforts to counter the opioid epidemic. The measure also would dedicate $12.5 million to “firearm injury and mortality prevention research.”

The legislation supplements an effort to rebuild the nation’s pandemic response infrastructure with lessons learned from the coronavirus. It would provide substantial increases in funding for pandemic preparedness, including $845 million for the Strategic National Stockpile, an increase of $140 million, and $745 million for the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, an increase of $148 million.

A Times investigation found that the stockpile, an emergency medical reserve intended to guard against infectious disease and bioterrorism threats, was woefully unprepared for the pandemic, in part because a substantial chunk of its budget — nearly half, in some years — was devoted to a single product: the anthrax vaccine.

In anticipation of another year of high migrant traffic at the southwestern border, lawmakers designated an additional $1.45 billion for Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help with personnel overtime costs, medical care for migrants and funding for nonprofit groups that shelter migrants once they are released from border custody.

The measure also would give the Internal Revenue Service a $675 million increase, its largest in more than two decades.

Passage of the legislation would also unlock some funding first outlined in last year’s $1 trillion infrastructure law, a key priority for lawmakers in both parties. The bill also includes significant increases in funding for climate resilience, an area that already received $50 billion in new money in the infrastructure package.

As it doled out funds across the federal government, Congress also increased spending on itself. The bill would raise office budgets for House lawmakers by 21%, the largest increase since 1996, to give traditionally underpaid congressional staff a pay raise. And after the Jan. 6 riot, the bill would provide $602.5 million for the U.S. Capitol Police, an increase of $87 million, to help hire more officers.

It also directs officials to place a plaque on the west side of the building to recognize the law enforcement officers and agencies who responded to the riot.

The bill also would close a loophole that allowed makers of flavored e-cigarettes to sidestep the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to regulate products derived from tobacco. Makers of vapes in flavors like gummy bear and watermelon abandoned plant-based nicotine in favor of what they advertise as a lab-made, synthetic formulation to evade oversight.

For several individual lawmakers, the measure marked the long-heralded return of earmark, now billed as community funding projects, which allowed them to divert money to projects in their states or districts for the first time in more than a decade.

It was also peppered with personal priorities for Biden, including reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, a landmark law to combat domestic violence and sexual assault that he wrote as a senator in 1994. The National Cancer Institute’s budget would also rise by $353 million to $6.9 billion, much of that increase going to the so-called cancer moonshot, which he launched after the death of his son Beau from brain cancer.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

Nominations for ‘Be The Difference’ Awards Open

The Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz County has opened the nomination period for the 15th Annual Be the Difference Awards. The awards honor the individuals, groups, nonprofits and businesses that transform Santa Cruz County through volunteerism.

People can share their stories of inspiration by nominating worthy candidates through March 23.

Each year the Volunteer Center reaches out to the community asking for stories of dedicated volunteers, nonprofits that effectively engage volunteers, and businesses that champion civic engagement. In 2020 the event went virtual during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2021 the Volunteer Center took a break from the event to focus on the pressing needs of the community.

The top 50 nominees will receive special recognition at the Be the Difference Awards event on May 18 at the Santa Cruz Warriors Arena and five selected winners will receive additional highlights.

To learn about the nomination process and the event, visit scvolunteercenter.org.

Watsonville’s Longtime City Clerk Retires

Watsonville leaders past and present showered longtime Watsonville City Clerk Beatriz Vasquez Flores with praise at Tuesday night’s Watsonville City Council meeting, honoring the outgoing official for her 42 years of service to the municipality.

Along with kind words from active city council members and City employees, former mayors Manuel Bersamin, Antonio Rivas and Nancy Bilicich and retired city attorney Alan Smith also took to the podium to celebrate the long-standing public servant.

“I never saw her have a bad day at the office. I’m sure she did, but it never seemed to interfere with her work,” said Smith, who worked hand-in-hand with Vasquez Flores for the majority of his quarter-century as the City’s legal counsel. “We’d argue with each other sometimes and we’d laugh together, even in the most exasperating circumstances.”

Vasquez Flores started her career with the City as an intern with Watsonville Police Department at 18 and worked her way up to the executive team. She has served as the Watsonville City Clerk for the past 14 years, handling the City elections and supporting the city council in various capacities. She attended college while working for the city and raising three sons, earning her bachelor’s degree in 2015.

In an emotional speech, Vasquez Flores thanked dozens of co-workers, city council members, friends and family for helping her throughout her four-decade career. She gave a special thanks to her son, Kristian Flores, who attended college courses with her and helped her with homework.

“I love this community and I love serving the community that I grew up in,” she said. “I’m going to miss everyone.”

Many who spoke Tuesday said that Vasquez Flores was inspirational for the way she balanced work, school and her family. It wasn’t out of the ordinary for Vasquez Flores to answer phone calls and text messages from city council members on the weekends or while she was on vacation—even when she was across the globe in Paris.

“You always answered,” Mayor Ari Parker said.

Bersamin and Rivas said that Vasquez Flores, as one of the few Latinos in Watsonville’s executive team when they were in office, was also an inspirational figure for Watsonville’s rising Latino and Chicano leaders. Smith lauded Vasquez Flores for her commitment to transparency, public access to government proceedings and free and fair elections.

“No one has done more for the city than you have,” Bersamin said.

Friday is Vasquez Flores’ final day with the City.

The city council will appoint her replacement in the coming weeks. 

In retirement, she says she wants to continue traveling with her husband, Ramon, to scenic hiking locations around the globe. This year, they are planning to go to Japan and Korea when those countries lift Covid-19 restrictions and also do a section of the famed Camino de Santiago in Europe.

Ukrainians in Santa Cruz Mountains Worry for Home Under Siege

Helen Bieliaieva, 65, normally lives near the railway station in the center of Kyiv.

But she’s been in Santa Cruz County visiting her Ukrainian friend Julia, 49, since October.

“She cannot go back,” said Julia, who asked we don’t use her last name, out of fear of reprisals from people who are supportive of Vladimir Putin.

“I don’t know what happened with my house now,” Bieliaieva said, explaining that one bomb already landed 800 meters away from her house, and another about a kilometer away.

On Tuesday, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a resolution condemning the “unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.”

“The situation in Ukraine is heartbreaking and a real threat to democracy and human rights around the world,” said 3rd District Supervisor Ryan Coonerty, who represents the North Coast and Bonny Doon. “We needed to raise our voice.”

In the interview, on March 4 Bieliaieva said it felt strange to hear news reports that Russia was planning an invasion.

“They say the date there will be an attack on Ukraine,” she said. “I didn’t believe it.”

While she feels lucky to be in the United States, she also finds it frustrating to be stuck here when there’s so much going on over there.

“I would like to go to my town and to help my people, you see. But I can’t,” she said. “I want to help territorial defense. I can make food.”

Julia describes the feeling as more akin to guilt than relief.

Bieliaieva agrees.

“I can’t eat; I can’t sleep; because every minute we are waiting for new bombs, you see?” she said. “But we do what we can do.”

And on March 3, with the invasion in its second week, Bieliaieva got an idea. While in Julia’s workshop, looking at her friend’s assortment of fine linen, she wondered, Why not make scarves in the colors of the Ukrainian flag and sell them? Julia loved the plan and suggested they send the proceeds to Bieliaieva’s Prague-based daughter, who volunteers for an organization that helps Ukraine’s territorial defense forces.

Even if NATO ships Ukraine weaponry, they’ll still need plenty of tourniquets, bandages, thermal covers and decompression kits, Bieliaieva’s daughter texted.

Julia said she boils the scarves in order to create a bunched-up texture that looks quite trendy.

According to the Santa Cruz Mountains resident, there are at least seven Ukrainian families in the Bonny Doon area alone.

Anna Usatenko, 31, accounts for one of those households.

Her sister was in Kyiv but managed to evacuate to a safer part of the country the day after the invasion began on Feb. 24. But she still has friends in the capital.

“I got a lot of texts from them recently,” she said. “If Putin will occupy Ukrainian part, it will be like whole Ukraine under Auschwitz.”

On March 1, one of these texts arrived from a friend in Kyiv, whose dad lives in the Zaporizhzhia area, reporting he came under Russian gunfire.

“They shooting on his vehicle, and his friend passed away in the vehicle—but her father is alive,” Usatenko said. “She was angry, and I was angry.”

Usatenko did what she could to provide emotional support to her friend, but is all too aware of just how tenuous the situation is.

“You never know what can happen any day there,” she said. “The sky is not under control; we don’t have the weapons that can stop the bombing.”

She was disappointed NATO has declined to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

Bieliaieva says the spirit of her fellow citizens won’t be extinguished by a few bombs.

“Ukrainian people think it’s better to die than live in a concentration camp,” she said. “Because Ukrainians will never be slaves.”

She smiles as she thinks back to the Euromaidan movement, the winter 2013-14 wave of civil unrest where demonstrators pushed for closer relations with the European Union. It started just down the street from her house.

“I was very active,” she said. “Scary, but I have my temper. And I’m free. And I don’t want to be slave—and I help all people in Maidan.”

During the protests, people would sleep outside in the public square, even though it was around negative-5 degrees Fahrenheit out.

“And for what they need—some blankets, food—I help them,” she said. “Every day I was in Maidan.”

She is trying to get her U.S. visa extended, hoping she won’t have to seek refugee status. Her burning desire to return is evident.

After all, Bieliaieva’s 71-year-old sister and her 77-year-old husband are still in Kyiv.

“Now they hide in subway station,” she said.

Julia’s parents live just 30 minutes outside of Kyiv.

“They are sitting in the basement,” she said, showing a photo they sent of a makeshift barricade made of assorted materials like cardboard, sticks, a pole and a pallet. “They are trying to protect their windows.”

Along the North Coast in Davenport, Joel Sorto, 42, directed his brother Noe Sorto, 40, and Jose Reyes, 28, a co-worker, as they affixed hearts made out of corrugated metal—and other symbols—to a fence.

They’re from Central America, not Eastern Europe, Joel points out. But even though they don’t know any Ukrainians, themselves, they felt it was important to do something creative to show solidarity with the people over there, Joel explained.

“We’re just trying to be creative and to support,” he said. “We spent all week making them.”

They got the reclaimed metal from a woodshop in the Santa Cruz Mountains. And they used redwood cut from Bonny Doon trees to fashion petals for some of the sunflowers, a symbol of peace and Ukraine’s official flower. Installing the wooden ones proved a welcome addition, since cardboard flowers they’d put up the previous day showed signs of “wilting” from overnight rain.

The crew even painted a large Ukrainian flag with a dove at the center.

It now hangs from a picturesque dilapidated building, the site of some of the most visible messages to first responders during the aftermath of the CZU Lightning Complex fire.

“This is pretty much all you can do,” he said, considering the plight of those trapped in war’s clutches on the other side of the globe. “It’s really sad.”

Watsonville Turns to Bonds to Meet Steep Pension Costs

The Watsonville City Council gave staff the green light to begin the process of issuing taxable bonds in hopes of paying off steep unfunded pension obligations over the next three decades.

According to a 2020 California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) report, the City of Watsonville is facing roughly $98 million in unfunded pension obligations that it hopes it can pay off over the next 23 years. Issuing $40 million of the so-called “refunding” bonds is one tool the City will use to try to slowly dig itself out of debt, and free up general fund dollars for other day-to-day uses.

Refunding bonds are generally considered a low-risk option for municipalities to refinance existing debt at a lower interest rate.

Consultant Urban Futures, Inc. projects that, thanks to current low interest rates, the City will pay roughly $59 million in total on the bonds that it hopes to issue sometime this spring. But projections also show the City could save anywhere between $1.1 million and $1.76 million annually over the next four fiscal years if they do issue the bonds.

The taxable bonds differ from traditional pension obligation bonds—which many cities in California have reluctantly turned to in addressing debilitating retirement costs—in that the latter is typically repaid with general fund dollars and is more volatile. A taxable bond, meanwhile, is repaid by funds generated by a local tax. In Watsonville’s case, the City will use the funds generated annually by a property tax measure approved by voters several years ago that addressed pension costs, also known as the Pension Tax Override.

There will be no new tax associated with this series of bonds, staff said.

Staff will return to the city council for final approval on this year’s bonds and any other bonds it might issue in the future.

County’s Juvenile Hall Set for Needed Upgrades

The Santa Cruz County Probation Department is in the final stages of securing state funding for a major upgrade to the Juvenile Hall, a project county officials say will help better secure the facility, give youth offenders recreational activities and offer job skills for their eventual release.

Plans include a brand new 6,800-square-foot indoor multi-purpose recreation area. They also include upgrades to the kitchen and greenhouse for a “seed-to-table” program that will teach the inmates culinary skills, says Juvenile Hall Superintendent Sara Ryan.

“It will give the kids usable skills they can put on a resume,” Ryan says.

The facility will also get seismic and security upgrades.

According to Nicole Steel, a project manager with Santa Cruz County Public Works’ Capital Projects Division, the job will help the Juvenile Hall align with Title 15, a rule that sets minimum standards for detention facilities.

The funds have already been secured through Senate Bill 81—known as the Juvenile Justice Realignment bill—a 2007 law that sets standards for detention facilities.

The price tag for the gym is just over $2.3 million, with Prop. 81 funds covering $1.3 million. Prop 81 will cover all but $14,000 of the $9.5 million kitchen upgrade.

The State Fire Marshall still needs to approve the work, and the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors will approve the bidding process for the work at an upcoming meeting, Steel says.

Ryan says that an average of 14 young people are housed in the Juvenile Hall at any time. That is an improvement from two decades ago, when that number was closer to 60.

That progress, she says, comes thanks to a focus on alternatives to incarceration such as electronic monitoring, house arrest, mediation, rehabilitation and family counseling.

The department has done a lot of work with detaining youth only when necessary, Ryan says. 

“It’s a lower population, and that’s because anyone who can receive appropriate services is released,” Ryan added.

In making the changes, county officials are also adhering to Senate Bill 823, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed in 2020. The law will shut down the state’s youth prisons by July 2023, and shift the responsibility for their incarceration to the counties. According to EdSource, some 10,000 young people were jailed in 1996, a number that has since decreased by 93%,

The County’s efforts have made Santa Cruz County a model nationwide for the way it addresses youth offenders, says attorney Ben Rice, who chairs the county’s Juvenile Justice and Dependency Commission.

“The County has done extraordinary work in the past in reducing the number of kids and youth going into the Juvenile Hall by coming up with smart programming, diverting kids out, having programs out there that parents and youth can be referred to,” Rice says.

But many jurisdictions—Santa Cruz County included—lack proper facilities to house offenders who commit violent crimes such as assault, robbery or homicide.

“The unintended consequence is that we are not prepared to take the youth we were required to take,” Rice says.

Santa Cruz County is now sending some of its violent offenders to Sonoma County, where officials have built the necessary infrastructure. Currently, one youth from Santa Cruz County is housed there, but with that coming to an end soon, and those types of inmates set to be housed locally, the upgrades are a necessary step, Rice says.

County officials say that from 2010 to 2020, Santa Cruz County sent 25 offenders between the ages of 16 and 18 to the Department of Juvenile Justice. All were male, with average confinement of 2.7 years.

“The rationale of [Senate Bill 823] was to keep kids closer to home,” he says. “That just wasn’t happening with our youth going out to Stockton. It just makes it a pipeline to prison … This is exactly the kind of thing that our county, and every county, should provide.”

Voters Will Determine Future of County’s Rail Line

The fate of Santa Cruz County’s rail line is now in the hands of the voters.

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted 4-0 to place on the June 7 ballot an initiative which, if successful, would amend Santa Cruz County’s general plan to prioritize development of a bike and pedestrian trail along the rail line running from Watsonville to Santa Cruz, while “railbanking” the tracks for possible future development.

Supervisor Zach Friend recused himself from the vote, explaining that he has property near the rail line and therefore has a conflict of interest.

The supervisors also accepted a report detailing the estimated influence of the initiative, outlining the initiative’s financial impact, and how it affects the county’s general plans, its housing element and land use, among other things.

One of the most controversial and divisive issues to face county residents in years, the future of the rail line—and longtime efforts to either bring passenger rail to the 32-mile stretch or convert it to a trail—hangs in the balance.

In February, the nonprofit Santa Cruz County Greenway submitted more than 12,000 signatures to bring the issue before voters. The group envisions a future in which commuters use a two-lane paved path for “active transportation” such as bicycles, wheelchairs and skateboards, with a divider and a separate path for pedestrians.

They say the path would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle traffic.

Opponents call the initiative misleading and say that the removal of the tracks will almost certainly be permanent and therefore would be the end of any plans for countywide commuter rail.

Board Chair Manu Koenig, the former executive director of Greenway, centered his 2020 supervisorial campaign around the issue—he unseated longtime Supervisor John Leopold in that election.

Koenig has long said that a passenger rail service here would be unworkable, expensive and an ungainly addition to the relatively small county of 270,000 or so residents.

He pointed out that, in some places, it would be less expensive to build a trail alongside the track. The report also says that maintaining the rail for freight could cost $60 million, Koenig said.

County staff estimates that repairing the line for freight service could run from $48.7 to $63.7 million.

“Really we need to be budgeting in how we’re going to maintain this facility once it’s constructed,” he said. “I think our community is going to have to have a very real consideration about what we can afford and what we can get done, and I’m glad the report provides some clear information on that.”

In railbanking, jurisdictions save their rail lines and associated infrastructure for future use, while focusing on other development until rail is deemed feasible.

While Greenway has said the move allows for the possibility of future rail service, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) Executive Director Guy Preston has said that passage of the initiative will likely mean the removal of the tracks.

Most of the 12-member commission has indicated that they favor keeping the tracks in place and some said they would reject both abandonment and railbanking, should the issue come as an action item.

The discussion included more than a dozen members of the public, which were evenly divided in their opinions, but all of whom supported placing the issue on the ballot.

Greenway counts thousands of supporters countywide, including hundreds of individual endorsements.

But while Greenway has garnered significant support for the initiative, it remains unclear how the vote will go. 

The group No Way Greenway—formed in opposition—calls the initiative misleading.

That group has picked up endorsements from the Santa Cruz County Democratic Party, the Democratic Club of North Santa Cruz County, the Mid County Democratic Club and the College Democrats at UC Santa Cruz. 

Four Watsonville City Council members also oppose it, along with two from the Santa Cruz City Council. Supervisor Greg Caput, who said he “strongly opposes” the initiative, said it is still important to let voters decide.

“I strongly believe that we (should) put it on the ballot,” he said.

While the outcome of the vote could change county code to bring a focus to the development of a trail-only model, it will not mean that railbanking will happen immediately, since the U.S. Surface Transportation Board has jurisdiction over such matters.

Either way, the RTC, which owns the line, will soon consider what to do with the line in the short-term, with the commission this spring set to mull an interim plan.

Further complicating the matter is that RTC bought the Santa Cruz Branch Line from Union Pacific in 2012, but not the freight easement, which is now held by Saint Paul and Pacific Railroad.

Council Places Future of Watsonville’s Growth in Voters’ Hands

Should Watsonville expand outward in an effort to meet mounting housing and economic needs? Or will it continue to restrict its growth, and increase its housing density in favor of protecting every inch of the rich surrounding agricultural land?

These are the questions Watsonville voters will have to answer come November.

The Watsonville City Council at its Tuesday meeting placed the extension of Measure U, a landmark ballot measure approved by voters in 2002, on the Nov. 8 election.

In doing so, the elected leaders will give the city’s voters an opportunity to determine if the restrictions on where, when and how the city could expand have had a positive impact on the community over the last 20 years.

A report presented to the city council on Tuesday painted a largely negative picture of the measure’s effect on everyday life, stating that, among other things, it has hamstrung the city’s economic growth and will likely make state-mandated housing goals all but impossible to achieve if it is renewed through 2040.

But the Committee for Planned Growth and Farmland Protection—the group spearheaded by environmentalist and agricultural representatives that gathered some 2,400 signatures to bring the item to the council—in a letter to the City filed by their attorney says that the report is flawed, illegal and one-sided.

They say that it only focuses on the negatives of the measure, and omits or understates several housing initiatives and documents that lay out a way for Watsonville to meet its state-mandated goals through infill development.

Watsonville City Attorney Samantha Zutler at Tuesday night’s meeting pushed back on that assertion.

“I don’t think there’s any indication that this presentation, which simply provided facts, was unbiased,” Zutler said.

The council had three choices at Tuesday’s meeting: accept the extension of the measure as a city ordinance, place it on the upcoming June primary or send it to voters in November.

Several city council members said they supported placing it on the November ballot because it would give the committee and City time to meet and resume talks that have stalled for various reasons over the last three years.

The More Things Change

Measure U is an amendment to the City’s general plan that established a so-called “urban limit line” that nixed any development of agricultural land surrounding the city—save for a few exceptions.

Its roots can be traced back to ugly annexation battles for properties west of Highway 1 in the 1990s that pitted Watsonville against environmentalists, farmers and other county jurisdictions and agencies. As it is today, the city was in the midst of housing affordability and unemployment crises after roughly 3,000 jobs, mostly middle-class gigs in the canning industry, were shipped out of the country as a result of the North American Free Trade Agreement’s implementation in 1994. Trying to spark economic growth, the City sought to expand its footprint in the hopes of luring other large employers to replace the blue-collared professions that had fled.

But county officials scrapped those plans because they believed Watsonville’s expansion would negatively impact the agricultural industry, which serves as a major revenue and job generator for the area.

From that defeat, however, arose Action Pajaro Valley, a nonprofit that brought together the community to help create a long-term plan of how Watsonville would grow and meet the challenges the city then faced.

The end result was Measure U, and in 2002 Watsonville voters approved it with 60% of the vote.

Watsonville would give up most of its annexation plans to the east and west, and would instead focus its efforts to the north in the Buena Vista area. In addition, the City would also develop the Manabe-Ow property (then Manabe-Burgstrom) for industrial use, provide more senior housing on the southeast side of the city and eventually annex property off Atkinson Lane to build needed affordable housing.

The first round of protections baked into the measure expire in November and the rest will phase out in 2027.

Measuring Progress

Much of Measure U’s planned growth has not been realized, according to the report from consultant Economic & Planning Systems presented Tuesday.

Development in the growth areas included in Measure U has yielded just 207 housing units, the report stated.

In addition, the Manabe-Ow property has only fulfilled about 194,000 square feet of commercial development (the FedEx distribution center), compared to the 1 million square feet proposed in the area’s specific plan. On top of that, the job creation projected in Measure U has also lagged—only about 200 of the 2,390 employment opportunities have been realized, according to the report.

But the committee says that those shortcomings are not the direct result of Measure U. They say the failure to develop those areas falls on the shoulders of the City and is more directly connected to litigation against the municipality brought forth by special interests such as environmentalists, agriculture and the local pilots’ association.

The committee also says the City is misrepresenting the number of potential sites within city limits that can be redeveloped into housing. It cites numbers in the City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element that state the municipality has 201 sites, or roughly 105 acres, that are either vacant or “underutilized.” 

In addition, the committee says that the passing of recent state housing laws that allow single-family homes to be upzoned into four-plex properties will help the city meet its increasing mandates. The City’s Downtown Specific Plan that is expected to be approved in the coming months will also open up more sites for residential development, the committee says.

During public comment, one person from the committee suggested the City should invoke eminent domain to take over vacant sites in which property owners have not pursued redevelopment.

But the report presented Tuesday included an analysis of the properties identified in the housing element that found that there are now 147 vacant properties within the urban limit line. Of those properties, 40 would not face significant challenges—such as airport safety zones, existing entitlements and proximity to wetlands—that prohibit residential development. And only 10 are currently ready to be redeveloped into housing without a zoning change or additional analysis.

Those 40 parcels, according to the report, would produce just 281 housing units.

Projections from the upcoming Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) determined by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments show that Watsonville will likely need to approve some 2,100 housing units over the next eight years—that’s on top of the 300 or so units that it will carry over from its current RHNA allocation. As such, Measure U’s extension, the report states, would create a “significant barrier” to meet housing goals.

The report also took a look ahead to see what sites near the urban limit line would make sense to redevelop should voters rebuke the extension in November, and all protections end in 2027.

For residential development, the study identified 77 acres adjacent to Wagner and East Lake avenues as a “strategic growth” area that could produce around 860 housing units.

For commercial development, the historic 13.6-acre Redman House parcel across the street from the new Hampton Inn & Suites hotel would likely “have a strong positive impact on the City’s General Fund” if turned into a business complex with shopping, dining and lodging, the report found.

What was said?

There was little discussion from the council on the item, though some councilmembers referenced Watsonville’s limited developable space throughout the night during staff presentations on the City’s housing element and park fees.

About a dozen people spoke during public comment, all of them in favor of extending the measure. This included a handful of members of the Watsonville Wetlands Watch’s Board of Directors and Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau President Arnett Young.

All of them said that the extension of the measure would mean the preservation of the Pajaro Valley’s role as an agricultural power and halt urban sprawl.

Committee member Sam Earnshaw in an email following the meeting said that he was disappointed that the City’s presentation was tilted toward the negative impacts of the measure. He also said that he felt the city council did not acknowledge the committee’s 32-page impact report it prepared for the elected leaders.

That report highlighted the positive impact Measure U has had on agriculture preservation and infill development but did not address its impact on the issues that the city faces, including rising housing costs and increased demand for services needed to help low-income residents that make up a bulk of the jobs in the agriculture industry.

The report also largely shrugged off the costs and difficulties associated with rezoning and redeveloping sites that have set back several housing projects in Watsonville, including at least three large developments that are either in litigation or facing environmental challenges.

Councilman Lowell Hurst, who was previously on the council around the same time as the inception of Measure U, said that much of Tuesday’s conversation ran parallel to the conversations from the 1990s during the previous annexation battles.

“I feel like I’m having a Déjà vu moment, back into the time,” he said. “We’ve had these discussions previously, and I think we’re going to have more discussions because there are a lot of things that are ambiguous and maybe misunderstood about the constraints on the City. Hopefully, those will come out in some dialogue and we need more time for that dialogue.”

What Characteristics Should Santa Cruz’s Next Police Chief Have?

The community has until March 24 to weigh in on the process.

‘A Force of Nature’: Land Conservation Pioneer Diane Porter Cooley Dies

The Santa Cruz County luminary's legacy will live on.

House Passes $1.5 Trillion Spending Bill as Democrats Drop COVID Aid

Measure fueled in large part by bipartisan support for a $13.6 billion aid package to help Ukraine as it endures Russia's invasion.

Nominations for ‘Be The Difference’ Awards Open

The awards honor the individuals, groups, nonprofits and businesses that transform Santa Cruz County through volunteerism.

Watsonville’s Longtime City Clerk Retires

Outgoing official Beatriz Vasquez Flores was honored by the Watsonville City Council for her 42 years of service to the municipality.

Ukrainians in Santa Cruz Mountains Worry for Home Under Siege

There are at least seven Ukrainian families in the Bonny Doon area alone.

Watsonville Turns to Bonds to Meet Steep Pension Costs

budget
The City will use 'refunding' bonds to try to dig itself out of debt, and free up general fund dollars for other day-to-day uses.

County’s Juvenile Hall Set for Needed Upgrades

Plans include a new 6,800-square-foot indoor multi-purpose recreation area, upgrades to the kitchen and greenhouse and a culinary program.

Voters Will Determine Future of County’s Rail Line

In June, voters will decide whether to prioritize the development of a bike and pedestrian trail running from Watsonville to Santa Cruz.

Council Places Future of Watsonville’s Growth in Voters’ Hands

Voters will determine if the restrictions on where, when and how the city could expand have positively impacted the community.
17,623FansLike
8,845FollowersFollow