1 Santa Lucian • September 2012 Santa Lucian · San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 NONPROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO. 84 SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 The Moment of Truth (in labeling)

Santa Lucian • September 20121

Don’t Miss:Don’t Miss:Don’t Miss:Don’t Miss:Don’t Miss:

“Bitter“Bitter“Bitter“Bitter“BitterSeeds”Seeds”Seeds”Seeds”Seeds”

Sept. 13, SLOSept. 13, SLOSept. 13, SLOSept. 13, SLOSept. 13, SLO

- see page 2- see page 2- see page 2- see page 2- see page 2

The official newsletter of the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club • San Luis Obispo County, California

Protecting andPreserving theCentral Coast

SantaLucian

IIIII n s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d en s i d eYour favorite place 2

Bioneers’ local power 3

Organic panic 5

Sting Spanish Springs 6

Sacramento CEQA slam 10

Classifieds 11

Outings 12

Please recycle

This newsletter printed on100% post-consumer recycled paper with

soy-based inks

September 2012Volume 49 No. 8

Santa LucianSanta Lucia Chapter of the Sierra ClubP. O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

NONPROFIT ORG.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPERMIT NO. 84

SAN LUIS OBISPOCA 93401

The Moment of TThe Moment of TThe Moment of TThe Moment of TThe Moment of Truth (inruth (inruth (inruth (inruth (inlabeling) is Nearlabeling) is Nearlabeling) is Nearlabeling) is Nearlabeling) is Near

By Michele Simon,Nationofchange.orgAugust 1, 2012

In case you had any doubt thatCalifornia’s Prop 37—whichwould require labeling of foodcontaining genetically-modifiedorganisms (GMOs)—is a signifi-cant threat to industry, a topfood lobby has now made itperfectly clear.

In a recent speech to the AmericanSoybean Association (most soy grownin the U.S. is genetically modified),Grocery Manufacturers Association(GMA) President Pamela Bailey saidthat defeating the initiative “is thesingle-highest priority for GMA thisyear.” You may not know the GroceryManufacturers Association, but itsmembers represent the nation’slargest food makers—those with themost at stake in the battle over GMO

GMO Myths and TGMO Myths and TGMO Myths and TGMO Myths and TGMO Myths and Truths Reportruths Reportruths Reportruths Reportruths Report

Genetically modified crops are promoted on the basis of a range of far-reaching claims from the GM crop industry and its supporters. They say thatGM crops: Are an extension of natural breeding and do not pose different risks from naturally bred crops Are safe to eat and can be more nutritious than naturally bred crops Are strictly regulated for safety Increase crop yields Reduce pesticide use Benefit farmers and make their lives easier Bring economic benefits Benefit the environment Can help solve problems caused by climate change Reduce energy use Will help feed the world.

However, a large and growing body of scientific and other authoritativeevidence shows that these claims are not true. Evidence presented in thisreport indicates that GM crops: Are laboratory-made, using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GM crops Can be toxic, allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety Do not increase yield potential Increase pesticide use Create serious problems for farmers, including herbicide-tolerant “superweeds,” compromised soil quality, and increased disease susceptibility in crops Have mixed economic effects Harm soil quality, disrupt ecosystems, and reduce biodiversity Do not offer effective solutions to climate change Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes – poverty, lack of access to food and, increasingly, lack of access to land to grow it on. Based on the evidence presented in this report, there is no need to take riskswith GMOs when effective, readily available and sustainable solutions to theproblems that GM technology is claimed to address already exist. Conventionalplant breeding, in some cases helped by safe modern technologies like genemapping and marker assisted selection, continues to outperform GM inproducing high-yield, drought-tolerant, and pest- and disease-resistant cropsthat can meet our present and future food needs.

Lead author Michael Antoniou, PhD,is head of the Gene Expression andTherapy Group, King’s CollegeLondon School of Medicine, an expertin the use of genetic engineeringtechnology who holds inventor statuson gene expression biotechnologypatents. Download a PDF of the full GMOMyths and Truths report athttp://earthopensource.org/index.php/reports/gmo-myths-and-truths. Then go to www.carighttoknow.orgto find out what you can do about it.

Democracy School:Democracy School:Democracy School:Democracy School:Democracy School:What YWhat YWhat YWhat YWhat You Need toou Need toou Need toou Need toou Need toKnow NowKnow NowKnow NowKnow NowKnow Now

FOOD LOBBY continued on page 9

SCHOOL continued on page 7

by Jeanne Blackwell

Food Lobby’Food Lobby’Food Lobby’Food Lobby’Food Lobby’s “Highests “Highests “Highests “Highests “HighestPriority” is Fighting GMOPriority” is Fighting GMOPriority” is Fighting GMOPriority” is Fighting GMOPriority” is Fighting GMOLabeling in CaliforniaLabeling in CaliforniaLabeling in CaliforniaLabeling in CaliforniaLabeling in California

As of August 15, Big Food and the biotech industry had committedmore than $25 million to the effort to defeat Proposition 37, theNovember ballot initiative that will require genetically modified food tobe labeled. Most of the “No on 37” money is coming from Monsanto,DuPont, other pesticide companies, and Pepsi/Frito Lay, Nestle, andCoca-Cola. Supporters of the initiative include the American PublicHealth Association, Consumer Federation of America, CaliforniaCertified Organic Farmers and the Organic Consumers Association.Thousands of the one million signatures that put Prop. 37 on theballot came from SLO County.

Do we or do we not have a right toclean water? And if we do, do we or dowe not have a right to ban hydro-fracking in our county, the processused increasingly by oil and gascompanies across the nation --courtesy of a fistful of exemptionsfrom laws protecting our water, airand ecosystems, leaving a trail ofpolluted aquifers and flaming kitchentaps?

2Santa Lucian • September 2012

Change of Address?Change of Address?Change of Address?Change of Address?Change of Address? Mail changes to: Mail changes to: Mail changes to: Mail changes to: Mail changes to:

Sierra Club National Headquarters85 Second Street, 2nd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105-3441

or e-mail: or e-mail: or e-mail: or e-mail: or e-mail:[email protected]

Visit us onthe Web!

w w ww w ww w ww w ww w w. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .. s a n t a l u c i a .s i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r gs i e r r a c l u b . o r g

Outings, events, and more!

2500

SSSSSanananananttttta a a a a LLLLLuuuuuccccciiiiiananananan

EDITORGreg McMillanLindi DoudLinda SeeleyThomas A. CyrEDITORIAL COMMITTEE

The Santa Lucian is published 10 times ayear. Articles, environmental information andletters to the editor are welcome. Thedeadline for each issue is the 13th of theprior month.

send to:Editor, Santa Lucianc/o Santa Lucia Chapter, Sierra ClubP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA [email protected]

Santa Lucia Chapter

2012 Executive Committee Greg McMillan CHAIRPat Veesart VICE CHAIRLinda Seeley SECRETARYPatrick McGibney MEMBERLindi Doud MEMBER

Cal French COUNCIL OF CLUB LEADERSLindi Doud, Patrick McGibney TREASURERS

Committee ChairsPolitical Chuck TribbeyConservation Sue HarveyMembership Cal FrenchLitigation Andy GreensfelderNuclear Power Task Force Rochelle Becker

Other Leaders

Calendar Sales Bonnie Walters 805-543-7051Outings Joe Morris [email protected]/Kayak openWebmaster Monica Tarzier [email protected] Guide Gary Felsman

Chapter Director Andrew Christie 805-543-8717 [email protected]

Andrew [email protected]

[email protected]

Printed by University Graphic Systems

Office hours Monday-Friday,12 p.m.- 6 p.m., 974 Santa RosaStreet, San Luis Obispo

The Executive Committee meetsthe second Monday of everymonth at 5:30 p.m. at the chapteroffice, located at 974 Santa RosaSt., San Luis Obispo. Allmembers are welcome to attend.

Coordinator Kim Ramos, Admin and Development [email protected] Assistant Coordinator Yvonne Yip - events & social networking

Santa Lucia ChapterP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA 93406

Denny MynattPRINT MEDIA COORDINATOR

Sierra Club, PO Box 421041, Palm Coast, FL 32142-1041

Bitter SeedsBitter SeedsBitter SeedsBitter SeedsBitter Seeds

My Piece of AmericaMy Piece of AmericaMy Piece of AmericaMy Piece of AmericaMy Piece of America

Sierra Club General MeetingSierra Club General MeetingSierra Club General MeetingSierra Club General MeetingSierra Club General MeetingThursdayThursdayThursdayThursdayThursday, Sept. 13, 7-9 p.m., Sept. 13, 7-9 p.m., Sept. 13, 7-9 p.m., Sept. 13, 7-9 p.m., Sept. 13, 7-9 p.m.

The Sierra Club has unveiled a newonline hub to recognize, share andhelp protect America’s most treasuredoutdoor places, including the Califor-nia Coast, the Sierra Nevada, the SanGabriel Mountains, and the BerryessaSnow Mountain region. The “My Piece of America” sitehighlights ongoing work by the SierraClub to permanently protect publiclands in today’s technology-driven age– including campaigns in the fourhighlighted regions. “The Sierra Club’s mission toexplore, enjoy, and protect the planetis as vital today as any time in theSierra Club’s 120 year history,” saidSierra Club Executive DirectorMichael Brune. “We want to recon-nect people with their sense of joy andwonder, and provide a way to channeltheir renewed passion into enduringlands protection so this and futuregenerations can enjoy the greatoutdoors.” The “My Piece of America” websiteis built to not only allow users toupload and view content of theirfavorite special places, but also toconnect with conservation campaignson the ground in California. Visitorsto the site can learn about, takeaction on and join the Sierra Club’swork to protect the coast, the SierraNevada Mountains, the San GabrielMountains, and the Berryessa SnowMountain region. The Sierra Club is working on theground to protect these special wildplaces through community-drivenefforts for permanent protectioncombined with statewide campaignsto end forest clear cutting and

counteract the effects of climatechange will have on California’swildlife. With trip giveaways, beautifulphotos, personal stories and actionopportunities, the site will provide anengaging invitation to be a part ofAmerica’s lands legacy. America’spublic lands belong to us all. For more than a century specialplaces like the Sierra Nevada and theBig Sur coast have been saved so thatpeople from all backgrounds canenjoy all they have to offer. Today,millions of people recreate, retreat,and recharge in America’s parks,national monuments, wildernessareas, and other public lands. But we’re not done yet; ourmembers continue to work so thatplaces like the San Gabriel Moun-tains and the Berryessa SnowMountain region can be enjoyed byfuture generations for years to come. California’s coast is a string ofnature’s gems, attracting more the12 million visitors every year. Ourcampaign is working with peoplethroughout the state to safeguardnatural systems that will protectwildlife and ensure that Californianshave clean water, a thriving tourismeconomy, and an unparalleled wildlegacy to pass on to future genera-tions. Our public lands have also becomemajor economic drivers. They play avital role in California’s $46 billionoutdoor recreation economy, whichsupports local communities and408,000 jobs throughout the state. Visit the website at www.sierraclub.org/MyPieceofAmerica.

Californians, share your favorite wild places

Genetically engineeredfoods (GMOs) are raisingsafety and ecologicalconcerns for the future, butthe effect they are havingon farmers in Third Worldcountries is their mostdevastating immediateconsequence. Farmers inIndia must buy the seeds forevery harvest – no seed-saving allowed — fromagribusinesses like Monsanto, who control their use and price, along with themandatory expensive pesticides and fertilizers that must be used with them.The result has been massive debt and a growing wave of suicides by farmerswho have lost everything. Winner, Oxfam Global Justice Award and the 2011Green Screen competition Award at the International Documentary FilmFestival in Amsterdam. Come see this gripping new documentary and hearhow you can help pass the state ballot initiative to label GMOs. SteynbergSteynbergSteynbergSteynbergSteynbergGalleryGalleryGalleryGalleryGallery, 1531 Monterey St, SLO. Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355., 1531 Monterey St, SLO. Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355., 1531 Monterey St, SLO. Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355., 1531 Monterey St, SLO. Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355., 1531 Monterey St, SLO. Info.: Joe Morris, 549-0355.

By Amanda Wallner, Organizer, Sierra Club California Coast ResilientHabitats Campaign


Americansfrom coast tocoast arepushing toend thenation’saddiction topolluting,19th centuryfossil fuels —

coal, oil, natural gas — by embracingrenewable, job-generating energysources such as wind and solar. With clean energy prosperity insight, there are well-meaning peoplewho suggest that nuclear power couldbe part of the solution. The SierraClub respectfully but vehementlydisagrees with them, and a growinggroup of concerned volunteers has, infact, begun accelerating the Club’sefforts to address this dangerousindustry. Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disasteronly made it clearer that the nuclearindustry stands in the way of theclean energy future our childrenexpect, says volunteer Leslie March,who is helping to lead the Club’s “NoNukes” campaign. “We need to heedthe lessons learned from this disaster.Our aging reactors are up for re-licensing. Twenty-three have the exactsame model design as Fukushima andanother 12 are very similar.” “Just as important,” March says, “iswhere and how we store radioactivewaste. Nuclear energy is not clean,nor is it green. The climate-disruptingpollution spewed during the nuclearfuel processing cycle decreases anybenefits.” The reality is that nuclear power isprohibitively expensive, it’s proppedup by subsidies, it endangers workers,it hurts the land, it’s unsafe, and it’svulnerable to terrorism. (Check outwww.sierraclub.org/nuclear/factsheet.aspx). The Sierra Club takes a solutions-oriented approach to addressingenvironmental threats, includingclimate disruption, and it’s imperativethat we get the solutions right. This

push to move beyond nuclear powercomplements the work the SierraClub’s 1.4 million members andsupporters are doing on virtuallyevery front. It complements, for example, ourwork to protect water resourcesbecause water pollution is a frequentresult of nuclear power and radioac-tive waste storage. It complements our ResilientHabitats Campaign because we’reprotecting our wildlands and trea-sured landscapes from uraniummining and milling. It complements our environmentaljustice work because the nuclearindustry often imposes its dangersdisproportionately on poor neighbor-hoods and on communities of color.In short, there are lots of reasons I’mhappy to see our volunteers joiningthis effort. Susan Corbett, who workson the No Nukes team as chair of ourSouth Carolina chapter, notes thatmoney spent on nuclear plants couldbe put to much better, much saferuse, if spent on true clean energyinnovation. “Old nuclear plants,” shesays, “are ticking time bombs ofdeterioration — failure in those casescan mean an economic and environ-mental disaster for the adjoiningcommunities.” And of course, there’s the radioac-tive waste. “National transportation ofradioactive waste puts many commu-nities far away from reactors indanger,” Corbett says. With new information leaking dailyabout the consequences of Fuku-shima, the time is ripe to spread thetruth about this threat to our healthand environment. A Sierra ClubActivist team with more than 130members is working on this cam-paign at the local and national level. “The fights may be local, but oftenwe have to persuade elected officialsand decision-making agencies at thefederal level,” says Susan. The U.S. can do better than fossilfuels and nuclear power. Join ourNuclear-Free Campaign today.

Why Nuclear Power isNot an Energy Solutionby Sarah Hodgdon, Director of Conservation

On HoldOn HoldOn HoldOn HoldOn HoldNuclear Regulatory Commission halts reactor construction andNuclear Regulatory Commission halts reactor construction andNuclear Regulatory Commission halts reactor construction andNuclear Regulatory Commission halts reactor construction andNuclear Regulatory Commission halts reactor construction andlicensing. Most reactor projects already stymied by bad economicslicensing. Most reactor projects already stymied by bad economicslicensing. Most reactor projects already stymied by bad economicslicensing. Most reactor projects already stymied by bad economicslicensing. Most reactor projects already stymied by bad economicsand cheaper alternativesand cheaper alternativesand cheaper alternativesand cheaper alternativesand cheaper alternatives

On August 7, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) put a hold onat least 19 reactor licensing decisions – nine construction & operating licenses-- eight license renewals, one operating license, and one early site permit – inresponse to the landmark Waste Confidence Rule decision handed down twomonths earlier by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The NRC action was sought in a June 18, 2012, petition filed by 24 groupsurging the NRC to respond to the court ruling by freezing final licensingdecisions until it has completed a rulemaking action on the environmentalimpacts of highly radioactive nuclear waste in the form of spent, or ‘used’,reactor fuel storage and disposal. In hailing the NRC action, the groups also noted that most of the U.S. reactorprojects were already sidelined by the huge problems facing the nuclearindustry, including an inability to control runaway costs, and the availability offar less expensive energy alternatives. Diane Curran, an attorney representing several of the groups in the Court ofAppeals case, said “This Commission decision halts all final licensing decisions— but not the licensing proceedings themselves — until NRC completes athorough study of the environmental impacts of storing and disposing of spentnuclear fuel. That study should have been done years ago, but NRC just keptkicking the can down the road. With today’s Commission decision, we arehopeful that the agency will undertake the serious work.” San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace spokesperson Jane Swanson noted that,“Mothers for Peace in 1973, as part of its challenge of the original operatinglicense for the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, argued that the Atomic EnergyCommission, predecessor of the NRC, should not allow the generation ofradioactive waste without knowing how to isolate those wastes from theenvironment.”

At press time, long-awaited amendments to the county’s Ag Cluster Ordi-nance -- part of the struggle to maintain the county’s rural/agriculturalcharacter in the face of relentless development pressure -- were heading to theCounty Planning Commission’s August 30 meeting, and from there will go theBoard of Supervisors for final approval. The Board of Supervisors directed staff to draft amendments to the contro-versial Ag Cluster program in 2009. The proposed new amendments makesignificant changes that could serve to protect agricultural lands, offer greaterprotection of limited water resources, lessen impacts to agriculture and theenvironment from inappropriately sited subdivisions, and reduce rural sprawl. The amendments include extending the ag cluster program to coastal areas(Title 23). If these coastal zone changes are approved by the Supervisors andthe California Coastal Commission, the ag cluster program would allow for theclustering of underlying lots in the coastal zone into 2.5 acre parcels. For the inland area (Title 22), ag cluster amendments would require new lotsto be contiguous, increase minimum cluster lot size to 2.5 acres and requireon-site individual well and septic systems, and eliminate a controversial 100%“density bonus.” The cluster subdivision cannot use more than 5% of the total site area and ithas been clarified that ag buffers, roads and driveways and other residentialinfrastructure are to be included in that 5%. The remaining 95% percent of theland will be put under a permanent agricultural easement and shall be a singleparcel. Lands under a Williamson Act contract and properties in the RuralLands category are ineligible for consideration for clustering. Requirements for demonstrating water availability have been improved, as

CLUSTERS continued on page 8

NUKES continued on page 4Ag Clusters: Getting CloserAg Clusters: Getting CloserAg Clusters: Getting CloserAg Clusters: Getting CloserAg Clusters: Getting CloserOverhaul of County program shows promiseOverhaul of County program shows promiseOverhaul of County program shows promiseOverhaul of County program shows promiseOverhaul of County program shows promise

Many people believe that Commu-nity Choice Aggregation (CCA) is anidea whose time has come for SanLuis Obispo County. The Santa Lucia Chapter of theSierra Club lobbied successfully to getevaluation of the feasibility of a CCAprogram added to the County’sClimate Action Plan in 2011. The following year, when the City ofSLO’s Climate Action Plan was beingdrafted, the Chapter, joined by theEnergy Group of Transition Towns ofSan Luis Obispo County, got aprovision included in the City’s planto complement the County’s. Eric Veium, team leader of theEnergy Group, says the group hasundertaken organizing for develop-ment of a community choice energyprogram for San Luis Obispo County.“We are reaching out to a broad base CCA continued on page 8

of interested people, elected officialsand city and county staff to pass aresolution to commit to researchingwhat community choice will makepossible here.” Eric will report on theEnergy Group’s pro-gress as part ofthe “Eaarth – Our Local Conversa-tion” Transition Towns workshop onFriday, October 19, at the CentralCoast Bioneers Conference.

What is CCA?What is CCA?What is CCA?What is CCA?What is CCA? Established by law in six states todate, Community Choice Aggregationis a market-based tool that enablescities and counties to pool the energydemands of the residences andbusinesses in their jurisdictions topurchase or develop power on theirbehalf. Communities who want to

Hot THot THot THot THot Ticket at Central Coast Bioneersicket at Central Coast Bioneersicket at Central Coast Bioneersicket at Central Coast Bioneersicket at Central Coast BioneersConference: Community ChoiceConference: Community ChoiceConference: Community ChoiceConference: Community ChoiceConference: Community Choice


The sixth annual SLO Seed Exchange is happening Friday, October 5, 6-9 p.m., at the SLO Library Community Room

Open to the public - FREE educational event

Speaker: John DeRosier, CSA biodynamic grain farmerand teacher

Greg Ellis, One Cool Earth & Garden Matchmaking willassist in developing the evening program.

www.facebook.com/SloSeedExchange

co-sponsored by the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club.

The SLO Seed Exchange has been asked for the second year to donate seed for the STRIDE/HealSLO/CAFES summitin mid-October. Seed savers among us are contributing their organic style homegrown lettuce, parsley, dill, arugula,cilantro, radish, carrot, and calendula seed—3,000 to 5,000 seeds of each variety— for a Salad Bowl seed packet to begiven to each of the 250-300 summit attendees.

By Andrew ChristieChapter Director

On July 1, The Tribune’s front pagewas occupied by a richly deservedtribute to San Luis Obispo NaturalResources Manager Neil Havlik on theoccasion of his retire-ment. It is appropriate toapplaud his legacy: 6,500acres of natural openspace and hiking andbiking trails. It alsoshould be mentioned, perDan Buettner’s book“Thrive,” that NeilHavlik’s legacy is one ofthe primary reasons forthe high levels of personalwell-being and maximizedquality of life that led toSLO’s designation as thehappiest city in America.Not a bad retirement gift. But the article fostered apotential misconception:that the Natural Re-sources ProtectionProgram created seven-teen years ago as theresult of a tussle betweeneconomic and environ-mental interests -- a “messy andintense” struggle that gave birth tothe co-equal positions of naturalresources manager and economicdevelopment manager -- was a fightthat ended in 1995, and today theforces of development and preserva-tion function in automatic equilib-rium. (The “two apparently contradic-tory positions... now work coopera-tively, as protecting and promotingthe city’s natural resources are anessential part of its economic vision.”) Those who recall more recent cityhistory, such as the fight circa 2004-2006 to maintain the integrity ofnatural open space and the concept ofpassive recreation in the Conservationand Open Space Element might begto differ with that conclusion.Likewise the Johnson Avenue arearesidents who rose up in 2007 to beatback the proposal to develop theupper reaches of the hillsides thatdominate the community. As recently as 2011 a proposal wasfloated to move the Natural ResourcesProgram into the Park and Rec

department (a park and natural openspace are two very different animals)and demote the position of naturalresources manager, terminating thatequilibrium of co-equal interests“meant to strike a balance betweendevelopment and preservation.” In each instance, people had to

Calochortus ObispoensisCalochortus ObispoensisCalochortus ObispoensisCalochortus ObispoensisCalochortus ObispoensisHavlikensisHavlikensisHavlikensisHavlikensisHavlikensis

Over years, patchingTogether acres ofGreenbelt, nurturingLand Owner andCommunity Trust;Protecting nativeLife forms, rare,Threatened or endangered;Thriving in Open SpaceWith an AffinityTo serpentine hillsides;Quite rare, uniquelyLocal and universallyTreasured, Neil,You are a San LuisMariposa LillyOf a man.

- With gratitude,Jan Marx

June 23, 2012

How MrHow MrHow MrHow MrHow Mr. Havlik Made Us Happy. Havlik Made Us Happy. Havlik Made Us Happy. Havlik Made Us Happy. Havlik Made Us Happy

stand up and say “No!” In 1993, it wasSLO residents saying “no” to the ideaof city policy dominated solely by aneconomic development manager thatstarted the messy two-year fight thatcreated the Natural ResourcesProgram and made it co-equal withEconomic Development, creating thespace in which it was possible for NeilHavlik to make the visionary dealsthat preserved 6,500 acres of openspace and wildlife habitat. That fight was based on the aware-ness that environmental protection isa long-term concern that rarelycorresponds with the short-termneeds of cash flow, quarterly profitgoals, or keeping share prices highand investors happy. Nor are “protect-ing and promoting” necessarily thesame thing, a fact well known to thosecity residents witnessing Bishop Peakbeing loved to death thanks to thenationwide promotional efforts of theCity and the Chamber of Commerce,generating a level of use for openspace far out of line with the sur-

rounding neighborhoods which theopen space was meant to serve andnegating the purpose of preservedopen space: the chance to make aquiet connection with nature. (In a2008 Tourism Analysis, the Countyidentified the “Tourism Backlash”of traffic and crowding.)

Now, 39 years later, the NRC hasbeen forced by the federal court toacknowledge this necessity. Future actions by the agency willdetermine whether public confidenceis enhanced or further weakened. ” Lou Zeller, executive director ofBlue Ridge Environmental DefenseLeague, another petitioner to theCourt, said: said: “It appears that theCommissioners have, at least initially,grasped the magnitude of the Court’sruling and we are optimistic that itwill set up a fundamentally transpar-ent, fair process under the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act to examinethe serious environmental impactsof spent nuclear fuel storage anddisposal prior to licensing orrelicensing nuclear reactors.” Former NRC Commissioner PeterBradford said “It is important torecognize that the reactors awaitingconstruction licenses weren’t going tobe built anytime soon even withoutthe Court decision or today’s NRCaction. Falling demand, cheaperalternatives and runaway nuclear costshad doomed their near term prospectswell before the recent Court decision.Important though the Court decisionis in modifying the NRC’s historicpush-the-power-plants-but-postpone-the-problems approach to genericsafety and environmental issues, itcannot be blamed for the ongoingdescent into fiasco of the bubble onceknown as ‘the nuclear renaissance’.”

Nukescontinued from page 3

Information: 805-543-5364

San Luis Obispo’s economic specialinterests did not completely changetheir outlook on life in 1995. As thecurrent update of the city’s Land Useand Circulation Element goesforward, it would be good to remem-ber that the same competing inter-ests are still with us. Keeping thatbalance depends on the continuedwillingness of neighborhoods and theenvironmental community tocontend with the interests of privateprofit. It was the Johnson Avenueuprising of 2007, not “workingcooperatively,” that saved thehillsides and made it possible, fiveyears later, for the City to purchasethe land at a bargain price. And in 1995, things could havegone this way: no messy fight withbusiness interests = no NaturalResources Program = no 6,500 acresof preserved open space = SLO notthe happiest city in America. It was ever thus. Thrive (Chapter 5)makes it clear: eternal environmentalvigilance is the price of happiness.


TTTTTaking Issueaking Issueaking Issueaking Issueaking Issueproblematic environmental coverage & commentary in our local media

By John E. Sununu

And itshould neverbe used asan argumentfor abandon-ing the ideaof regula-tion.

“[National Organic] Standards board memberJohn Foster...was a grower, researcher and organicinspector. Foster said unannounced inspections areone method to improve the whole organic industry.The Organic Trade Association is also on record asbeing in favor of the recommendations. Thestandards board recommended mandatory unan-nounced inspections for at least 5% of certifiedoperations each year. ... “The vote of the NOSBdemonstrates a strong will to ensure that allproducers of organic food are in compliance everyday,” Foster said. “In my many years as an organicinspector, I came to see that this kind of protocolimproved not just compliance with the standards,but also provided real business value regardless ofscale.” - “National Organic Standards Board suggests unannounced inspections,” The Packer, Mar. 23, 2012.

Inevitably, the biggest fish inthe pond are best positioned toinfluence their regulators. It’scalled regulatory capture, andthe likelihood of it shouldalways be part of the debate.

Upshot: As a lobbyist, former Senator Sununu has learned a new vocabularywith which to befriend big business. The sight of crocodile tears shed for thefederal organic standard, flowing from this source, is akin to the calls fromSununu’s former colleagues to reform health care by abolishing health carereform. He is deploying a political strategy that “Taking Issue” fans have seenbefore, when Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters called for the “reform” ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (“Dark side to liberal government,”Tribune, Sept. 7, 2011), as dissected in our October 2011 issue. In the Walters/Sununu form of anti-regulatory magical thinking, weaknesses in a regulatoryregime always demonstrate the need to dispense with those regulations, notstrengthen them or make it harder for big money players to game the system.

The firstsentencedoesn’tbelongwith the

second and third. The deals satisfying the demands of BigPharma and Wall Street were about weakening the AffordableCare Act and the Dodd-Frank bill, the opposite of “overbearing.”Interestingly, Sununu is probably best known for advocating fora more “overbearing regulatory bureaucracy” that would haveapplied stronger federal regulations to Fannie Mae and FreddieMac, prior to the 2008 financial meltdown.

History tells us that, far from restrain-ing the power of big companies, anoverbearing regulatory bureaucracybenefits them just about every time.Last month, the White House releasede-mails detailing the deal it cut withPhRMA — the drug industry’s lobbyingarm — to win support for Obamacare.And the size and market share ofAmerica’s biggest banks have onlygrown since the passage of Dodd-Frank banking regulations.

And it’s still a lotbetter than thealternative: “In arecent study forthe Soil Associa-tion, ShaneHeaton found thatmore than 500food additives arepermitted for usein non-organic processed foods, and that organic food productsspecifically exclude the use of hydrogenated fats (also known astrans-fats), phosphoric acid, aspartame, monosodium glutamate(MSG) and sulphur dioxide. [Food additives] are permitted inorganic food processing…only if ‘the product cannot be producedor preserved without them.’” – wholekids.com

Deciding what is allowed in osten-sibly organic foods is easily themost important thing the NationalOrganic Standards Board does, yetthe list of allowed additives keepsgetting longer at big farm compa-nies’ request.

The organic standard isbeing weakened bycorporate capitalism andSoviet-style centralplanning? And theproblem is the rulesthemselves, not theparties trying to bend therules in their favor? Isthere perhaps a clearerpicture available of what’sreally going on? Yes, there is: “The [organic stan-dards] board has 15members, and a two-thirds majority is required to add a substanceto the list. More and more, votes on adding substances break downalong corporate-independent lines, with one swing vote. Six boardmembers, for instance, voted in favor of adding ammoniumnonanoate, a herbicide, to the accepted organic list in December.Those votes came from General Mills, Campbell’s Soup, OrganicValley, Whole Foods Market and Earthbound Farms, which had twovotes at the time. Big Organic lost that round. Had it prevailed, itwould have been the first time a herbicide was put on the list…. ‘Ifyou fill the slots earmarked by Congress for independent voiceswith corporate voices, you greatly mitigate the safeguards built intothe supermajority requirement of the law,’ [Cornucopia Institutedirector] Mr. Kastel says.” - “Has ‘Organic’ Been Oversized?,” New York Times, July 7, 2012.

Today, the National OrganicStandards Board keeps alist of 250 nonorganic foodadditives that can be usedunder the “certified organic”label. That’s three times thenumber listed just 10 yearsago. As the Soviets provedtime and again, a goodcentral committee can killjust about anything.

And ofcourse,oncefree of a federal standard, so can Monsanto, Archer DanielsMidland (both on Akin Gump’s client list), and every otheragribusiness giant engaged in the ceaseless quest for lessregulation and more profit -- precisely the reason why afederal organic standard needed to be established. In the Senate, Sununu twice tried to secure federalregulation of the insurance industry, saying of his NationalInsurance Act that it emphasized “the importance of a clear,consistent regulatory framework. The fragmented systemcurrently in effect has no place in a modern economy.” Thefederal charter made possible by his bill, said SenatorSununu, would enable insurance companies “to workunder a uniform set of regulations and an effective federalregulator.” Such are the fickle winds of shifting political fashion andthe strange ways they can blow in the interval between one’sservice as an elected official and transformation into alobbyist.

The organic farmers of Vermont – orNew Hampshire or anywhere else –can decide for themselves whatconstitutes “organic.”

Or not. On June 19, threeweeks before this op edappeared, CongresswomanLois Capps and Congress-man Richard Hannaintroduced the OrganicStandards Protection Actto ensure that productsbearing the USDA organicseal comply with theOrganic Foods ProductionAct of 1990. The legislation

would protect the organic farmingindustry and its expandingconsumer base by granting theUSDA’s National Organic Program(NOP) the legislative authority itneeds to more effectively protectthe integrity of certified organicproducts. “The Organic Trade Associationsupports the passage of theOrganic Standards Protection Act,which, if enacted, will give the U.S.Department of Agriculture andNational Organic Programadditional tools to safeguard theintegrity of the USDA Organicseal,” said OTA chief ChristineBushway. “California Certified OrganicFarmers support the OrganicStandards Protection Act tofurther ensure consumer confi-dence in high-quality organicproducts,” said Cathy Calfo,Executive Director/CEO, CCOF.“Our members include 2,400organic farmers, ranchers,processors and handlers whosecompetitiveness relies on a strongregulatory framework that is fairlyenforced.”

Whether tyrannyflows from themonarch or thebureaucrat, biggovernment neverserves the little guywell – a lesson thatorganic farmers ofAmerica have learnedthe hard way.

Summary: Corporations seeking maximum profit from the explosive growth in popularity of organic foods are intenton trying to dilute the definition of “organic”… and this somehow proves that Big Government is bad, the federal organicstandard should be abolished, and it should be left up to individual producers to define “organic” however they wish.

“Former U.S. Senator John E. Sununu’s dual career as a contributing op-ed writerfor The Boston Globe and an advisor to a lobbying firm is raising ethical questions.A review of Sununu’s columns reveals that they have not contained disclosures

about his ties to lobbying giant Akin Gump, where he serves as a “seniorpolicy advisor.” Indeed, Sununu has written about issues related to AkinGump’s lobbying without disclosing his role in the firm…. Politicalethics watchdogs found the Globe’s lack of disclosure troubling. ‘Sununushould have a tag line running at the bottom of all his columns, disclos-ing his affiliation with Akin Gump,’ Mary Boyle, a vice president of

Common Cause, said in an email. ‘Even if he’s not writing specifically about AkinGump or one of its cases, his affiliation in the industry is relevant.’”

“How organic food rules benefit big agriculture,”“How organic food rules benefit big agriculture,”“How organic food rules benefit big agriculture,”“How organic food rules benefit big agriculture,”“How organic food rules benefit big agriculture,” by John Sununu. The Tribune, July 15, 2012.

- “John Sununu: Lobby Shop Employee and Boston Globe Columnist,” by Joe Strupp & Oliver Willis, Media Matters for America blog, Jan. 17, 2012.


What’s ahead? Local Agency Formation Commission field trip, Price Canyon, July 21, 2011.

San Luis ObispoSan Luis ObispoSan Luis ObispoSan Luis ObispoSan Luis Obispo

Cambria

About desal...About desal...About desal...About desal...About desal...

In an ongoing effort to provide timely information on local environmentalissues, Greenspace – the Cambria Land Trust is reexamining past efforts tomeeting Cambria’s long term water needs. It released the report A Review ofWater Use & Water Management Alternatives in Cambria, California in July. The report analyzes information obtained through public records requests,California Urban Water Conservation Council records and Public Water SystemStatistics Reports to investigate a comprehensive, integrated water strategy forCambria that includes elements of both supply augmentation and demandreduction. Analyzing both historic and current water use records, the report identifieswater use trends and patterns, conservation opportunities and likely futureneeds in Cambria. It compares costs to produce equivalent water suppliesthrough seawater desalination at other facilities in assessing realistic costs thatlocal planners will encounter. This comparison suggests that water produced by seawater desalination inCambria will be two to three times more expensive than the costs estimated bythe Cambria Community Services District. The reexamination of long-term solutions in light of realistic cost estimatesprovides a framework for judging costs for alternatives such as conservationand recycling. Further analysis by agencies of regional solutions, conservation,recycling and storage alternatives will profit from the information presented inthe report. Report author James Fryer is an environmental scientist and water resourcesmanagement consultant. He headed the Marin Municipal Water District’s waterconservation programs in the 1990s and developed its Urban Water Manage-ment Plan, helped establish the California Urban Water Conservation Council,directed coral reef and water quality monitoring programs in the Florida Keys,and helped establish the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, the largest marineprotected area in U.S. continental waters. He also assisted the Florida Depart-ment of Environmental Protection with the development of water conservationrecommendations for Florida. Greenspace is reexamining past efforts to meeting Cambria’s long term waterneeds as part of its in an ongoing effort to provide timely information on localenvironmental issues. Through land acquisition and management, public education and advocacy,Greenspace seeks to protect and enhance the ecological systems, cultural

An abridgement of the remarks ofRichard Foster as submitted for therecord of the June 5 Pismo BeachCity Council meeting on the revisedEnvironmental Impact Report for theSpanish Springs development inPrice Canyon.

I confess this is a somewhat lengthydocument, but there is much thatneeds to be said and aired aboutdevelopment in and around PismoBeach. And I intend to be sharingthis document with others – whohave my permission to freely passthis document or parts of it to othersas they see fit.

On Rumors and TOn Rumors and TOn Rumors and TOn Rumors and TOn Rumors and TruthruthruthruthruthWe need to start with the realizationthat rumors and innuendo oncestarted often become accepted as factif they go unchallenged. We have atleast a couple of these false state-ments which need to be addressed. There are those who believe that weneed more housing in the SouthCounty because we are forcingpeople to live in Santa Maria (andcommute to jobs in San LuisObispo)…. If there were a higherdemand for housing in Pismo Beach(and thus the South County), therewould not be hundreds of lotsunbuilt and hundreds of homes forsale. So why do developers want tobuild (or have permission to build) inPismo Beach? Precisely becausehomes command a higher price inPismo Beach than they do in SantaMaria; all other factors being thesame, developers and contractors can

is grossly lacking. I will not commenton the many problems (or else Iwould never get this submitted bythe deadline, or I would never sleep tomeet the deadline), I will onlymention a few and my comments willbe limited to only a few of the“Significant and Unavoidable Im-pacts.” The development of Price Canyonand “Spanish Springs” deservessignificant time, attention, creativejuices, and other effort. We are talkingabout hundreds of homes along withother significant development whichwill change the character of the entireregion. First, as to the impact on view. TheEIR states: “Impact VIS-7: Thecumulative change in the overallvisual character in the Price Canyoncorridor resulting from developmentof Planning Area R would be substan-tial over the existing rural, open spacecharacter, which though mitigated toa large degree by aspects of the Pro-posed Project, would be a significantand unavoidable cumulative impact.” It would seem that prior to makingsuch a statement one might want torequest that the “Designated ScenicCorridor” status which Price Canyoncurrently enjoys be rescinded, or atleast acknowledge this plan. If thereis an intention to change this, thenlet’s be up-front and honest about thisintent.

On air qualityOn air qualityOn air qualityOn air qualityOn air quality Consider “Impact AQ-3: Futuredevelopment under the Specific Planafter mitigation, would result in

About that Economic Development StrategicAbout that Economic Development StrategicAbout that Economic Development StrategicAbout that Economic Development StrategicAbout that Economic Development StrategicPlan...Plan...Plan...Plan...Plan...

August 6, 2012

TO: SLO City Council

FROM: Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club

Following are our comments on the Draft Economic Development StrategicPlan (EDSP).

The Plan seems to take it as an article of faith that reducing developer impactfees will create head of household jobs, with no supporting evidence for thatclaim. The Council should request a range of studies on this subject — if suchexist — before accepting this premise. We would apply the same criticism to the alleged need for “permit streamlin-ing,” which also needs examination along the lines of perception vs. reality. Onits first page, the staff report states that said streamlining would “optimize theCity’s development review process,” and that “based on community input, thiswould also include a review of City environmental review procedures.” On Page43 of the EDSP we learn that “community input” and “the public engagementprocess” consisted primarily of interviews with 31 individuals, in search of “aninsider perspective,” primarily from the business community. This input presents a notable contrast with the finding that appears at thebottom of page 37 of Appendix A, that in comparison to other regional govern-ments, “the City appears to process permits efficiently with some of theshortest processing times.” The use in the staff report of the politically loaded term “job creators,” whichwas devised by one of the political parties seeking advantage in the currentpresidential election, does not seem appropriate in a staff report. We wouldhope to see it replaced going forward by the word “companies.” The idea promoted by the Plan that the City should abandon its nearlydecade-long policy of requiring developers to pay their fair share of the costsof development and infrastructure and the City be required to subsidize thosecosts should be considered in light of how successful the current policy hasbeen. In its comparison of development fees charged by the City to those chargedby the County, Paso Robles, Santa Barbara and Davis in Appendix A, thebackground report mentions on page 35 that “only the city of San Luis Obispoand the County of San Luis Obispo impose fees related to affordable housing oncommercial development,” without elaboration. This statistic is evidentlyconsidered to be so important it is re-stated, in a boldface call-out, on page 37.If by it inclusion and emphasis, the authors mean to suggest that affordablehousing fees should be eliminated and that instead inclusionary affordable

SLO continued on page 10

maximize their return in PismoBeach. It has been stated that there is onlytoken resistance to the massivedevelopments and annexationsproposed for Pismo Beach (“SpanishSprings”, “LRDM”, etc.) Yet therewere hundreds at the LAFCO meet-ings on these proposed annexationsand additions to Pismo’s Sphere ofInfluence stating their opposition tothis type of extensive development.Whether or not the people of PismoBeach support this type of develop-ment could be easily settled if the CityCouncil would take a non-bindingsurvey of the residents – yet they havechosen repeatedly not to do so. As opposed to the erroneousreports, these are the facts. Many ofus wonder what motive the CityCouncil might have that they consis-tently do not desire to know or exposethe truth.

“Spanish Springs” EIR concerns“Spanish Springs” EIR concerns“Spanish Springs” EIR concerns“Spanish Springs” EIR concerns“Spanish Springs” EIR concerns Although I am certain some well-meaning individuals have put in theirtime and effort to prepare this EIR, it

exceeding of the APCD emissionthresholds for ROG, NOx, PM10 andCO, a significant and unavoidableimpact,” “Impact AQ-6: The SSSPwould result in greenhouse gasemissions related to combinedoperational, area source, indirect andconstruction phase energy consump-tion, and impact which, lacking anadopted threshold, is assumed to besignificant and unavoidable,” and“Impact AQ-7: Future developmentunder the Specific Plan, in combina-tion with other development in theregion, will result in traffic increasesthat will cumulatively contributeemissions causing an unavoidablesignificant impact.” I thought the County recentlyprepared an Air Pollution Controldocument that commits SLO Countyto reducing air pollution. Will thedevelopment of “Spanish Springs”ignore this recently prepared docu-ment? Are our elected officials (at alllevels) working together to actuallyimprove our air quality, or are they

DESAL continued on page 10 SPANISH SPRINGS continued on page 7

Mar

cia

Cart

er

What exactly is the problem?

Cost: 300 percent over estimate

Pismo BeachPismo BeachPismo BeachPismo BeachPismo BeachAbout SpanishAbout SpanishAbout SpanishAbout SpanishAbout SpanishSprings...Springs...Springs...Springs...Springs...


Asserting our right to clean water byplacing a statutory ban on fracking inplace will, by stipulation, confer theright to impose the penalties forviolations. We can make a violation ofour Right to Clean Water ordinanceby a hydro-fracking company a capitaloffense, which means violators go tojail. Outrageous, you say? Consider theoption: without this ordinance, acompany can legally poison everydrop of our water and our localecosystem without so much as amother-may-I. How do we do it? Thought you’dnever ask. Democracy School teaches citizensand activists how to reframe exhaust-ing and often discouraging singleissue work (such as opposing toxicdumps, factory farms, and fracking) ina way that makes it possible toconfront corporate control on apowerful single front: people’sconstitutional rights. Global Exchange and the Commu-nity Environmental Legal DefenseFund are coming to SLO on October12 and 13 to hold a DemocracySchool session. Go here:www.celdf.org/democracy-school or

read “Rights vs. Wrongs” in the JuneSanta Lucian to get a preview. You can sign up yourself or findsomeone you know who can use thistool and put it to good use. We needpeople from every community. It willcost $120. This covers the cost ofmaterials, speaking fee and out-of-pocket expenses for the instructors.Also, this assures us that if there is alegal challenge to the resultingordinance, we have legal backup fromCELDF’s legal team, also at no costexcept travel expenses. This is anextraordinary deal. And you can betyour bottom dollar there will bechallenges to this. Many volunteers are overworked and

underpaid and the energy to do thiskind of work is generated out of purelove for nature and community. Iwould encourage you to pass the lovearound. Reach out and bring insomebody new. We need people fromevery community in SLO county. Tocover the cost, you can have fundraisers, find sponsors...who doesn’tneed clean water? Contact yourchurch group, restaurants, doggroomers, hair dressers, car wash,laundromats, landscape business,nurseries, grocery stores that uselittle sprayers on the veggies onceevery hour to keep them fresh. Theyare all potential sponsors and donors.We will have little placards made up

that these businesses can stick in theirwindows to show the Right to CleanWater is Everybody’s Business. CELDF and Global Exchange arelooking for a show of commitmentfrom this community before theyinvest their time and energy in this.I’ve told them that we can do what-ever it takes to get this done and inrecord time. Now is the time to showthem what we are made of. Maximum permitted attendance fora Democracy School session is thirtypeople. So far fifteen have signed up.Just email me if you want to get onthe sign-up list or find out if there areany remaining spaces:[email protected].

Schoolcontinued from page 1

In my judgment, GATT [The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade] is an endrun abound the environmental gains of the last century. And if there were anyinvestigative reporting worth a cent, they would be telling you that in thepapers. They don’t tell you that.

- David Brower, first Sierra Club Executive DirectorUniversity of Colorado at Boulder, 1993

The Trans-Pacific Partnership tradetreaty negotiations have been widelyand correctly criticized for lack oftransparency (see “One World GlobalGovernance for Real,” June, andwww.sierraclub.org/trade). Corporate insiders have not onlybeen privy to the negotiating texts buthave helped to write them. In aimingto create a “NAFTA on steroids”involving many Pacific Rim nations, itis Congress and the American peoplewho’ve been left in the dark about details, though some are now beginning toleak out. If that isn’t scary enough, consider two other facts: first, that multinationalcorporations are now empowered to spend almost unlimited amounts of moneyon “free speech” including that which may support (or tarnish) specificcandidates in elections, and second, that treaty law takes precedence overnational law. The combination amounts to a corporate curtailment of nationaldemocracy. In negotiations for previous “Free Trade” treaties such as NAFTA (NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement), we thought of our government as bargainingfor the collective best interests of our nation, and the rhetoric was that jobswhich might be lost would be offset by an increase in trade and overseasmarkets. We might have disagreed but there was at least the pretense that thegovernment’s aim was the greater good, a good result for the U.S. and a win-win overall. I think politicians actually believed this, and perhaps some still do,but it’s much harder to believe now, and I think this is the reason for trying tobypass Congress and the American people with the TPP. Multinationals have realized that by putting together their own enormousrule book on how the international economy works, one which will be theproduct of years of negotiations and many governments, they can present atreaty which is extremely resistant to major overhaul and which they can pushinto effect. In the U.S., the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision has giventhem a license to use all their financial muscle in the political arena. Thus thepresent equation is not of nation bargaining with nation, but multinationalinterests out-muscling national democracies. This is a march toward global economic integration while leaving democracybehind. We need to hold very tightly to democracy, as if it were a child indanger of being swept away by a powerful river. To fight that current, I thinkwe’re going to need all the democratic power we can muster. I’m not authorized to speak for Sierra Club on this matter. The opinionexpressed here is my own. I think that we – the broadest possible “we” –should work not only for increased transparency but also for a full stop to thesenegotiations. There is a lot more at stake here than just imports and exports.

TTTTTrade Trade Trade Trade Trade Treaties and Democracy:reaties and Democracy:reaties and Democracy:reaties and Democracy:reaties and Democracy:It’It’It’It’It’s Ts Ts Ts Ts Time to Be Afraidime to Be Afraidime to Be Afraidime to Be Afraidime to Be Afraidnot? How much degradation of air

quality should we expect? Will thefuture air on the Central Coast becomparable to the air quality of LosAngeles or the Bay Area (which is asignificant reason why many of us leftthose areas)? Just how many tons ofemissions of various types should beexpected? And will it accumulate inthe narrow Price Canyon? Will this bea good location for Senior Housing(as proposed)? I find the EIR grosslylacking in specifics on this issue. Thisis not a “NIMBY” issue; if we lose ourair quality, then we have nothing ofour quality of life to share.

On building codesOn building codesOn building codesOn building codesOn building codes “Roofs are to be oriented so thatinstallation of solar panels will befacilitated.” Why not just require theinstallation of solar panels in thisneighborhood? Would the City ofPismo Beach be willing to waive theexorbitant fees which currentlydiscourage the use of active solarinstallations? Is the developer resistantto doing this because there is no re-sale value? Why not require the use ofwhat we already know are effectiveactive and passive solar buildingcodes? And certainly passive solar iscost-effective! Perhaps all buildings(including homes) should be requiredto have adequate roof overhang toprovide the appropriate shade. Willthe buildings and windows be ori-ented so that during the summersolar heating will be minimized andduring the winter solar heating willbe maximized? On the 101: I had heard at thePlanning Commission that the newdevelopment “would pay an appropri-ate share” toward widening 101. Whatdoes that mean? The only reason towiden 101 is because of this newdevelopment. To my way of thinking,the share ought to be 100% for theresidents of “Spanish Springs,” but Iam led to believe the developers andthe City of Pismo Beach are thinkingof something like a “Regional Trans-portation Tax” -- a tax which everyonein the South County will pay inaddition to all the other taxes they arealready paying). But once again, this

information is not forthcoming anddirect. And I am not enticed by anoffer to add tertiary sewage treatmentto the existing sewage facility (apittance!) Furthermore, the “RegionalTransportation Tax” does not makethis development “revenue-neutral.”Is there some reason this informationis being withheld from both thepublic and from decision-makers? Icould easily lose trust in any informa-tion I am given when I am selectivelygiven only the information thatsomeone else wants me to have. Thedeveloper clearly does not care abouttrust, but I thought the EIR wasprepared by the staff, who work forPismo Beach (paid for by the devel-oper). Do not underestimate theimportance of gaining public trust. The statements that 72% of the landis designated “Open Space” and 33%protected by a conservation easementare also misleading and deceptive.Most of us already know that the 33%proposed for conservation easement island whose slope makes it unbuild-able; under these circumstances, theeasement is meaningless. A conserva-tion easement only has value where itis possible to build – not where build-ing it impossible or prohibitivelyexpensive. And we also know the trackrecord of Pismo Beach: OpenSpace means “land which is reservedfor future development” -- so theproposal is to ultimately developevery area possible. This part of the“marketing pitch” needs to be moretruthful. It is only appropriate that we recog-nize that Pismo Beach’s desire formassive development in Price Canyonis not solely a Pismo Beach concern.There are ramifications from thisaction throughout the area and atleast the entire South County. Anydevelopment proposal should betreated as such. The message is that more work onthe EIR is needed before it becomes ameaningful document for decision-making. An EIR is not merely abureaucratic requirement; it is meantto be a revealing and meaningfuldocument where creative energies areused to mitigate impacts from aproject or to alter the project so thatthe impacts become less.

Spanish Springscontinued from page 6

by Jim Diamond, San Francisco Bay Chapter


have requirements for a qualifyinghistory of agriculture on the parcel. Staff is recommending the alterna-tive that restricts agricultural clustersubdivisions to properties locatedwithin two road miles of the urbanreserve lines (URLs) of Arroyo Grande,Atascadero, San Luis Obispo, SanMiguel, Nipomo, Templeton, and PasoRobles, although the EIR analyzed theoption of site locations up to five road

miles from these URLs, which werecreated with the idea of containingdevelopment within the area theyproscribe. The Sierra Club commends Plan-ning staff for revising their originalrecommendation from a five-milelimit to two miles. Encouragingdevelopment five miles beyond theboundary of an Urban Reserve Linewould seriously beg the question ofwhat Urban Reserve Lines are for.

Clusterscontinued from page 3

increase the amount of non-polluting,renewable energy they use are lookingat CCA as a mechanism for doing so. In 2002, with the passage of AB 117,the ability of communities to imple-ment Community Choice Aggregationprograms was signed into law inCalifornia. Thanks to lobbying effortsby PG&E, Southern California Edisonand other utility giants to blockimplementation of the law, the state’sfirst CCA did not launch until May2010, when Marin Clean Energy wentonline, committed to reduction ofgreenhouse gas emissions andincreased use of renewables. The Marin Energy Authority is anon-profit public agency whichincludes the County of Marin and allof its cities and towns, who togetheroversee the county’s clean energyprogram. Its board is made up ofrepresentatives of the Cities ofBelvedere, Larkspur, Mill Valley,Novato, San Rafael and Sausalito, theTowns of Corte Madera, Fairfax, Ross,San Anselmo and Tiburon, and theCounty of Marin.

How does it work?How does it work?How does it work?How does it work?How does it work? Unlike a municipal utility, a CCAdoes not own the transmission anddelivery systems. Instead, the CCA isresponsible for providing energy to itscitizens and choosing the source andprice of that energy. For example,Marin Clean Energy partners withPG&E to deliver electricity andmaintain the power lines. PG&Ereads the electricity meters, issuesmonthly bills, and provides mainte-nance and repair services as theyalways have. Marin Clean Energyoffers two programs to its customers.“Light Green” electricity is 50%renewable, more than twice what hadotherwise been available to PG&Ecustomers. “Deep Green” electricityis 100% renewable energy and costsone penny more per kilowatt-hour. Inclusion in the CCA is not re-quired, and households and busi-nesses can opt out and have the utilitycompany continue providing theirpower. As of July 16, 2012, PacificSun News reports that 80% of MarinCounty had switched from PG&E toMarin Clean Energy. Even more exciting is the potentialfor CCAs to develop their owngeneration projects that not onlyincrease local employment butincrease the resiliency of the commu-nity to outside power disruptions andeconomic turmoil. Marin CleanEnergy has signed contracts for morethan 45 megawatts of new solar to bebuilt in California in 2012, includinga solar project at the San Rafael Air-port. The airport project is being builtby Synapse Electricity, a Muir Beach-based company, and will create 25jobs during the construction phase.The project will provide enoughenergy to power 280 homes per year.Marin Clean Energy has also con-tracted for new biogas projects inYuba and Solano Counties. Based on the success in Marin,many more California communities

are exploring the formation of a CCA,including Berkeley, Beverly Hills,Chula Vista, Emeryville, Oakland,Pleasanton, Richmond, San Fran-cisco, San Marcos, Vallejo, the KingsRiver Conservation District, WestHollywood and Los Angeles andSonoma Counties. Monterey andSanta Cruz have formed a CCA taskforce. Community leaders in South-

drome,” – that a small mom & popenergy provider will never be able tobeat the rates that can be offered by alarge utility company. In this econ-omy, residents and businesses can illafford to pay more for their energyneeds. However, these claims arelargely unsupported. Marin CleanEnergy reports that as of July 1, 2012,most residential customers pay only

provide jobs and create income tooffset municipal expenditures. Evenmore importantly, feasibility studiesindicate that, over time, CCAs shouldreduce electricity rates comparedwith investor-owned utilities (such asPG&E) because of the higher costs ofprivate financing. In a pilot projectfunded by the California EnergyCommission, CCA capital costs wereabout 5.5% compared to 12.9% forinvestor-owned utilities. CaliforniaEnergy Commissioner John Geesmanreflects California’s enthusiasm aboutthe possibilities of CCA when he says“The California Energy Commission isexcited about the potential forCommunity Choice Aggregators toincrease the amount of renewableenergy that is produced and con-sumed in the state.” The LGC recommends creating arate stabilization fund which willallow the CCA to hold prices steady,even if fuel prices rise. Veium believes that a seriousinvestigation must be performed andanalysis made of the risks and benefitsto the community. “I think what wewill find,” he says, “is that communitychoice energy will provide opportuni-ties for significant local renewableenergy, local economic developmentand a vehicle for innovation.”

CCA in SLO County?CCA in SLO County?CCA in SLO County?CCA in SLO County?CCA in SLO County? As we all know, PG&E is the electricelephant in the County’s living roomwhen it comes to energy decisions byour local elected officials. LEANEnergy U.S. reports that PG&E spent$44 million on Proposition 16, aballot initiative in California to blockCCAs from being formed. CCAs are currently active in sixstates. Illinois this year grew from 20aggregated communities to over 250,according to Shawn Marshall,Executive Director of LEAN Energy,and Utah, New York, Connecticut andColorado are contemplating CCAlegislation. Marshall says that LEAN Energy willprovide advisory support to commu-nity leaders, local governments andconsumers working toward establish-ment of CCA in their communities.“We will provide workshops andresources such as sample formationdocuments and access to a network ofCCA experts and practitioners.” Does the political will exist in SanLuis Obispo County to accomplish thegoal of community choice? “I thinkwe can generate it,” says Eric. “Theremay be some resistance from PG&E;however PG&E is an importantpartner in our energy system. Acollaborative relationship would bemuch more beneficial than anantagonistic one.”

ern California have formed the SanDiego Energy District Foundation toestablish a CCA.

Are WAre WAre WAre WAre We Really Getting Clean Energy?e Really Getting Clean Energy?e Really Getting Clean Energy?e Really Getting Clean Energy?e Really Getting Clean Energy? Critics of the concept of CCA arguethat it is impossible to tell, when youplug your coffeemaker into the socketin your home, where exactly thatenergy is coming from. The energygrid is not an isolated “container” andelectricity enters it from everywhere –solar plants, nuclear reactors anddirty coal plants. How can you be surethat the green energy you are buyingis actually what is being delivered toyou? The Pacific Sun News provides anexcellent analogy by the late MarinCounty Supervisor Charles McGlash-an, who championed CCA and was akey player in the creation of MarinClean Energy. He said “the electricalgrid is like a pond….[and] electricityis like water in the pond. Putting dirtywater (fossil-fuel generated electric-ity) into the pond dirties the entirepond; putting clean water into thepond cleans its entire contents,displacing dirty water with clean – ordirty electricity with clean.” The most important thing is whatgoes into the pond, as McGlashanwould say. If producing a cleanerenergy grid is the goal, supportingcompanies that produce cleanelectricity and supply it to the grid isthe means to that end.

The nature of air quality isanother good analogy. Wereduce vehicle emissions toimprove air quality, eventhough the air we breathedoesn’t necessarily come fromthe vicinity of our vehicle. It’sa common goal toward acommon benefit. (Pacific SunNews, “A Clean Break,” July16, 2012)

How Much?How Much?How Much?How Much?How Much? Critics are also concernedabout the “Wal-Mart syn-

$3.85 more per month for the LightGreen package. Commercial custom-ers pay an average of $3.31 per monthless in the summer and $4.12 more inthe winter. These are small prices topay for a much lower carbon foot-print. According to the Pacific Sun, theaverage MCE commercial customerusing 1,312 kilowatt-hours of energyduring a summer month will pay 91cents less than a PG&E customer forLight Green (50% renewable) energyand $12.21 more than a PG&Ecustomer for Deep Green (100%renewable) energy.

Risk-BenefitRisk-BenefitRisk-BenefitRisk-BenefitRisk-Benefit The Local Government Commissionsets forth the issues a community willneed to consider before making themove to a CCA. Besides the obviousbenefit realized by reducing green-house gas emissions, the LGC alsopoints out that the development oflocal generation projects would

CCAcontinued from page 3

We’re talking CCA To encourage the conversation, on Saturday, October 20, at 2:00p.m., Ecologistics will host a presentation on Community Choice Aggregation as part of theCentral Coast Bioneers Conference. The panel will include Shawn Marshall, the founder andExecutive Director of LEAN Energy U.S., Paul Fenn, the author of AB 117, California’s CCAlaw, Lane Sharman, co-founder of the San Diego Energy District Foundation, and AndrewChristie, Director of the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club. Letters of invitation to attendthe workshop have been mailed to 175 leaders from San Luis Obispo, Monterey and SantaBarbara Counties and 23 cities within those counties.

Paso Basin Overdraft VPaso Basin Overdraft VPaso Basin Overdraft VPaso Basin Overdraft VPaso Basin Overdraft Vote Sept. 25.ote Sept. 25.ote Sept. 25.ote Sept. 25.ote Sept. 25. A crucial vote on the declining Paso Robles Groundwater Basin is scheduledfor September 25 at the Board of Supervisors. The Board will consider amend-ments to the General Plan that designate the Paso Robles Groundwater Basinat a Level of Severity III (LOS III). The amendments will prohibit furthersubdivision of lands in the Paso Basin until the basin is no longer in overdraft. The amendments will apply only to lands within the county.


In Case You Missed It....

Now you see it... Our letter to the editorsetting the record straight on the labeling ofgenetically engineered food appeared in theJuly 14 print edition of The Tribune (right)but never showed up in the oddly jumbledletters section of the web edition (above).

Endorsers and volunteers wanted! Go to www.carighttoknow.org

TAKE ACTION

According to state filing reports, sofar GMA has spent $375,000 on itsefforts to oppose the labeling mea-sure, with its members addingadditional out-of-state lobbying powerin the tens of thousands of dollars.Never mind polling demonstratingthat a whopping 90 percent ofCalifornians think they deserve theright to know what they are eating.GMA also won’t bother to mention themore than 40 other nations (includ-ing the European Union, Brazil andChina) that already require foodmakers to disclose GMOs.

Lobbying to undermine healthLobbying to undermine healthLobbying to undermine healthLobbying to undermine healthLobbying to undermine health This is hardly the first time thenation’s most powerful trade associa-tion of food manufacturers hasmarshaled its resources to opposecommon-sense food and nutritionpolicy—at both the national and statelevels. As I documented in my book,Appetite for Profit, for years GMAflexed its lobbying muscle in statelegislatures all over the countryfighting bills that were simply tryingto remove junk food and soda fromschool vending machines. Big Food lobbyists have also bandedtogether to vociferously fight anyattempt to restrict out of control junkfood marketing to children on TV andother media. For example, in 2005, GMA was afounding member of the Alliance forAmerican Advertising, whose statedpurpose was to defend the foodindustry’s alleged First Amendmentright to advertise to children and topromote voluntary self-regulation as

an alternative to government action.More recently, the Grocery Manufac-turers Association was amongleading trade groups and corpora-tions opposing the federalgovernment’s attempt to improveindustry’s own voluntary guidelinesfor food marketing to children. As a Reuters special report fromApril explains, GMA’s chief lobbyistvisited the White House last July alongwith several top food industryrepresentatives (including fromNestle, Kellogg and General Mills) toscuttle an effort by four federalagencies that would have protectedchildren from predatory junk foodmarketing.

But food makers love labels,But food makers love labels,But food makers love labels,But food makers love labels,But food makers love labels,don’t they?don’t they?don’t they?don’t they?don’t they? It seems rather ironic that the samefood makers taking advantage ofevery inch of food packaging space toconvince shoppers to purchase itsproducts would object so strongly tolabeling for something they claim isnot harmful. Indeed, in recent years, the federalgovernment, recognizing that food

companies’ so-called “front ofpackage” labeling is out of control,commissioned not one but twoInstitute of Medicine reports to makerecommendations to fix the problemand un-confuse consumers. Unwilling to tolerate governmentintervention designed to help Ameri-cans, the Grocery ManufacturersAssociation has been aggressivelypromoting its own new nutritionlabeling scheme it calls “Facts UpFront.” But as Food Politics authorMarion Nestle has explained, this is anobvious end-run around the feds. Here is how the food industrydescribes its own voluntary program:Facts Up Front is a nutrient-basedlabeling system that summarizesimportant information from the

Nutrition Facts Panel in a simple andeasy-to-use format on the front of foodand beverage packages. Translation: We are repeatinginformation already required on theback of the package, now placing it ina format we like better on the front. See how that works? The foodindustry is always in charge. That’swhy the nation’s largest packagedfood lobby and its members areshaking in their boots over 90 percentof Californians wanting to see GMOlabeling on food. And no wonder, because as GMAPresident Bailey correctly warned heraudience: “If California wins, you needto be worried the campaign will cometo your state.” Very worried.

The letter below from the Santa LuciaChapter’s Executive Committee appeared inthe The Tribune on Saturday, July 14. Itdebunked arguments made by a biotechindustry rep against the labeling of geneti-cally engineered food and provided awebsite for those interested in helping outwith Proposition 37, the campaign to passthe ballot initiative for labeling GMOs. The Tribune printed a total of twelveletters over the period July 14-16. On the16th, eleven of them were reproduced on theTribune’s website. The twelfth, the sole omission, is the onereproduced below. It would be difficult for the Tribune toclaim an oversight in the transfer of theletters from their July 14 edition to theirwebsite, as there were only two lettersprinted that day — the second, ours,

immediately following the first. Bothappeared on the same page. But they didn’t try to make thatclaim. When we called the Tribune toinquire as to how this omission cameabout, both their Web Editor and theOpinion Page Editor declined toreturn our calls. In the absence of an explanationfrom the editors, one is left tospeculate as to what might havetranspired during the lag timebetween the appearance of our letterin print on Saturday and the repro-duction in cyberspace of all lettersfrom that weekend, except ours, onMonday. Somewhere in that 48 hours,perhaps someone had a chat withsomeone else. Perhaps a decision wasmade not to give further exposure to a

letter refuting thedubious arguments of theag biotech industry andspreading the word on theRight to Know ballotinitiative to label GMOs. The month beforepeculiar doings transpiredon the Tribune’s website,the campaign for theCalifornia Right to KnowGenetically EngineeredFood Act estimated thatBig Food would spendbetween 50 and 100million dollars statewideon the effort to defeatProposition 37. As no innocent explana-tion has been forthcom-ing for the omission thatoccurred on the Tribune’swebsite over the weekendof July 14, the reader isleft to surmise that, as faras one Central Coastmedia outlet is con-cerned, some of that cashneed not even be spent.

TTTTThe GMA has earhe GMA has earhe GMA has earhe GMA has earhe GMA has earned an anti-consumerned an anti-consumerned an anti-consumerned an anti-consumerned an anti-consumerrrrrreeeeeputaputaputaputaputation in tion in tion in tion in tion in WWWWWashington and staashington and staashington and staashington and staashington and state lete lete lete lete legis-gis-gis-gis-gis-lalalalalaturturturturtures fes fes fes fes for opposing just aor opposing just aor opposing just aor opposing just aor opposing just about ebout ebout ebout ebout evvvvvererererery fy fy fy fy foodoodoodoodoodsafsafsafsafsafetyetyetyetyety,,,,, f f f f fair trair trair trair trair tradeadeadeadeade,,,,, animal w animal w animal w animal w animal welfelfelfelfelfararararareeeee,,,,, and and and and andconsumer right-to-knoconsumer right-to-knoconsumer right-to-knoconsumer right-to-knoconsumer right-to-know lew lew lew lew legislagislagislagislagislation puttion puttion puttion puttion putffffforworworworworwararararard bd bd bd bd by puby puby puby puby public interlic interlic interlic interlic interest gest gest gest gest grrrrroupsoupsoupsoupsoups.....

Food lobbycontinued from page 1

labeling. For example, soft drink andsnack giant PepsiCo, cereal makersKellogg and General Mills, and ofcourse, biotech behemoth Monsanto.


2011 Crop Grass Fed BeefEstate Grown Extra Virgin Olive Oil

Available Now-Delivery AvailablePlease Get in Touch For More Information

Greg and Linda McMillan

805-238-4820 [email protected]

A Proposal to Deny CommunitiesA Proposal to Deny CommunitiesA Proposal to Deny CommunitiesA Proposal to Deny CommunitiesA Proposal to Deny Communitiesthe Ability to Protect Public Healththe Ability to Protect Public Healththe Ability to Protect Public Healththe Ability to Protect Public Healththe Ability to Protect Public Healthand the Environmentand the Environmentand the Environmentand the Environmentand the EnvironmentIt is becoming a late-summer Sacramento perennial: as the end of the legisla-tive session nears, certain legislators push to weaken the California Environ-mental Quality Act (CEQA), the state law that helps make sure more pollutionisn’t added with every sizeable construction project. As we went to press,multiple large-scale attacks were being mounted and draft bill language for a“California Priority Project Plan Implementation Act” was circulating amonglegislators, with the clear intent of weakening CEQA’s environmental review.In response, environmentalists and labor leaders joined forces and signed onand distributed to the legislature this analysis warning about the bill:

A draft CEQA exemption circulated in the Capitol Building would exemptprojects that are consistent with the density, use type and intensity shown in ageneral plan, specific plan, community area plan, sustainable communitiesplan or other land use plan for which an EIR has been prepared.

1. Proposal Exempts Large-High-Polluting Projects from Environmental1. Proposal Exempts Large-High-Polluting Projects from Environmental1. Proposal Exempts Large-High-Polluting Projects from Environmental1. Proposal Exempts Large-High-Polluting Projects from Environmental1. Proposal Exempts Large-High-Polluting Projects from EnvironmentalReviewReviewReviewReviewReview. . . . . The exemption would apply to virtually all types of projects: : residen-tial, commercial, industrial, public works. This would include oil refineries,power plants, hazardous waste dumps, incinerators, freeways, sewage treat-ment plants, port and airport expansions and many others. Real world ex-amples are outlined below.

2. Exemption Guts SB 375, Landmark, Bipartisan Greenhouse Gas Law2. Exemption Guts SB 375, Landmark, Bipartisan Greenhouse Gas Law2. Exemption Guts SB 375, Landmark, Bipartisan Greenhouse Gas Law2. Exemption Guts SB 375, Landmark, Bipartisan Greenhouse Gas Law2. Exemption Guts SB 375, Landmark, Bipartisan Greenhouse Gas Lawand other CEQA Infill Reforms. and other CEQA Infill Reforms. and other CEQA Infill Reforms. and other CEQA Infill Reforms. and other CEQA Infill Reforms. The exemption would treat residential sprawlthe same as transit-oriented development, undermining the policies of TheSustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act and related legislation. Residential sprawl that destroyed prime farmland, increased traffic and vehiclemiles travelled, increased energy consumption, increased air pollution, andincreased greenhouse gas emissions would get as much CEQA relief as transitoriented development. Although the exemption has introductory findingsabout the benefits of SB 375 and its planning process, it would allow projects tobe exempt even if the sustainable communities strategy did not comply withGHG targets set by the Air Resources Board.

3. Exemption Will Lead to New Lawsuits over General Plans and Zoning,3. Exemption Will Lead to New Lawsuits over General Plans and Zoning,3. Exemption Will Lead to New Lawsuits over General Plans and Zoning,3. Exemption Will Lead to New Lawsuits over General Plans and Zoning,3. Exemption Will Lead to New Lawsuits over General Plans and Zoning,Slowing Down Development and Jobs.Slowing Down Development and Jobs.Slowing Down Development and Jobs.Slowing Down Development and Jobs.Slowing Down Development and Jobs. The exemption shifts attention fromCEQA to outdated planning and zoning decisions, thereby creating newavenues of litigation against those decisions. At the same time, the exemptionprovides no limitations on standing, timelines for lawsuits to be disposed,mandatory mediation, or other streamlining currently available under theCEQA process.

4. Proposal T4. Proposal T4. Proposal T4. Proposal T4. Proposal Turns Back Clock to Promote Urban Sprawl over “Smarturns Back Clock to Promote Urban Sprawl over “Smarturns Back Clock to Promote Urban Sprawl over “Smarturns Back Clock to Promote Urban Sprawl over “Smarturns Back Clock to Promote Urban Sprawl over “SmartGrowth.” Growth.” Growth.” Growth.” Growth.” The exemption treats 1970’s-era urban sprawl the same as infilldevelopment, eliminating 30 years of progressive CA land use policies thatpromote higher density, affordable urban development over sprawl thatdestroys parklands and prime agricultural lands.

5. Proposal Exempts Projects based on Outdated Plans and Information.5. Proposal Exempts Projects based on Outdated Plans and Information.5. Proposal Exempts Projects based on Outdated Plans and Information.5. Proposal Exempts Projects based on Outdated Plans and Information.5. Proposal Exempts Projects based on Outdated Plans and Information.The exemption would rely on outdated land use plans as old as 20 or 30years. An EIR on these plans prepared so long ago could not possibly haveconsidered current circumstances or required mitigation measures for impactson them. These outdated plans will not have considered environmental impactssuch as global warming or toxic chemical contamination whose toxicity wasrecently understood.

6. Exemption W6. Exemption W6. Exemption W6. Exemption W6. Exemption Would Apply Even Where Plans Conflicted with Oneould Apply Even Where Plans Conflicted with Oneould Apply Even Where Plans Conflicted with Oneould Apply Even Where Plans Conflicted with Oneould Apply Even Where Plans Conflicted with OneAnotherAnotherAnotherAnotherAnother. . . . . This exemption would apply to a land use if it is authorized by oneplan even if it conflicted with another plan such as the sustainable communi-ties strategy under SB 375. The exemption would allow uses to proceedwithout environmental review even if there were fundamental conflicts inplanning documents.

housing shall be made a mandatory requirement as a percentage of all futuredevelopment, with no option for in lieu fees, we would consider that a worth-while exchange. We urge the Council to give staff direction to that effect. We commend to the Council’s attention the caveat concluding the comparisonin this section: “The level of services and quality of life desired by the City alsoshould be factored in — not only because they are highly valued by the commu-nity, but also because they help to fuel job growth.” We would extend this caveat to cover the Plan’s function as an argument forthe reduction of impact fees and forcing the city and taxpayers to make up thedifference, the “streamlining” of the environmental review process, the lower-ing of standards for construction of infrastructure, and the incentivizing ofdevelopment. The national landscape is littered with hollowed-out municipali-ties that sought to compete with each other by incentivizing development with“streamlined” checkbox permitting, tax holidays, slashed development fees, andan increase in the burden of the cost of development infrastructure placed ontheir general funds and their residents. We do not recommend that San LuisObispo set off down that road. Instead of taking to heart the draft Plan’s evident proposition that the City

needs to become more like SantaBarbara, Paso Robles, or Davis, wesuggest that consideration be given tothe possibility that the City’s currentimpact fees and environmental reviewprocess may have more than a little todo with its aforementioned level ofservices and the maintenance of aquality of life currently ranked the

highest inthenation.

Thankyou for

the opportunity to comment,

Desalcontinued from page 6

SLOcontinued from page 6

resources and marinehabitats of the North Coastarea of San Luis ObispoCounty as a nationaltreasure. In keeping with thatmission, the GreenspaceDirectors support policiesand promote programs thatprovide Cambria residentsand businesses a reasonableamount of water withoutdoing further harm to thewatersheds, forest, fisheries,and other water dependentresources we treasure. Theysupport an environmentallysound, comprehensive andintegrated water strategythat includes elements ofboth supply augmentationand demand reduction.

Now on Faceboook

search: “Santa Lucia” and become our friend!


ClassifiedsNext issue deadline is September 14 September 14 September 14 September 14 September 14.To get a rate sheet or submit your adand payment, contact:Sierra Club - Santa Lucia ChapterP.O. Box 15755San Luis Obispo, CA [email protected]

CYNTHIA HAWLEYATTORNEY

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONLAND USE

CIVIL LITIGATION

P.O. Box 29 Cambria California 93428Phone 805-927-5102 Fax 805-927-5220

A portion of any commissiondonated to the Sierra Club

Pismo toSan Simeon

GREEN HOMES

Les KangasSolar Energy ConsultantREC Solar, Inc.775 Fiero Lane, Suite 200San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Office: (805) 528-9705Cell: (805) 305-7164Toll Free: (888) OK-SOLAR (657-6527)Fax: (805) 528-9701

Hold YHold YHold YHold YHold Your Wour Wour Wour Wour Wateraterateraterater“Slow it, sink it, spread it” is themantra of enlightened water managerswho know that water works best whenit stays on the land where it falls. Now that mantra can be yours, too,along with healthier soils, happierwildlife, and reductions in your waterbill, thanks to the tips and techniquesin Rainwater Management for LowRainwater Management for LowRainwater Management for LowRainwater Management for LowRainwater Management for LowImpact DevelopmentImpact DevelopmentImpact DevelopmentImpact DevelopmentImpact Development, a publication ofthe Appropriate Technology Coalition --SLO Green Build, the Santa Lucia

Chapter of theSierra Club andthe SurfriderFoundation,available for $10postage paid,while supplieslast. Mail yourcheck to SierraClub, P.O. Box15755, SLO93406.


Outings and Activities CalendarSeller of travel registration information: CST 2087766-40. Registration as a seller of travel does not constitute approval by the State of California.

This is a partial listing of Outingsoffered by our chapter.

Please check the web pagewww.santalucia.sierraclub.org for

the most up-to-date listing ofactivities.

All our hikes and activities are open to all Club members and the general public. Please bring drinkingwater to all outings and optionally a lunch. Sturdy footwear is recommended. All phone numbers listedare within area code 805 unless otherwise noted. Pets are generally not allowed. A parent or responsibleadult must accompany children under the age of 18. If you have any suggestions for hikes or outdooractivities, questions about the Chapter’s outing policies, or would like to be an outings leader, callOutings Chair Joe Morris, 549-0355. For information on a specific outing, please call the listed outingleader.

September 9-11September 9-11September 9-11September 9-11September 9-11Explore the wild, windswept islands of Channel Island National Park. Enjoy thefrolicking seals and sea lions. Train your binoculars on rare sea and land birds.Hike trails bordered by blankets of wildflowers and plants found in no otherplace on earth. Kayak or snorkel the pristine waters— or just relax at sea. Alltours depart from Santa Barbara aboard the 68’ twin diesel Truth. $590 feeincludes an assigned bunk, all meals, snacks, beverages, and the services of aranger/naturalist who will travel with us to lead hikes, call attention to itemsof interest and present evening programs. Proceeds will go to benefit SierraClub California’s political programs. To make a reservation, mail a $100 check,payable to Sierra Club to leader Joan Jones Holtz, 11826 The Wye St., ElMonte, CA 91732. Contact leader for more information, 626-443-0706;[email protected].

Island Hopping in Channel Islands National ParkIsland Hopping in Channel Islands National ParkIsland Hopping in Channel Islands National ParkIsland Hopping in Channel Islands National ParkIsland Hopping in Channel Islands National Park

Joe Morris, Outings ChairSierra Club, Santa Lucia Chapter(805) [email protected]

Sat, Sept. 8, 9 a.m. Over the TSat, Sept. 8, 9 a.m. Over the TSat, Sept. 8, 9 a.m. Over the TSat, Sept. 8, 9 a.m. Over the TSat, Sept. 8, 9 a.m. Over the TopopopopopHike, Cerro San Luis. Hike, Cerro San Luis. Hike, Cerro San Luis. Hike, Cerro San Luis. Hike, Cerro San Luis. Moderately-paced, 5-mile hike over Cerro SanLuis via Rock Garden Trail, about 2.5-3 hrs. duration, led by geologist.Some steep hills and a rocky section.Bring boots and water. Meet atparking lot/restroom area at LagunaLake. Info.: Mike Sims, 459-1701 [email protected]. Rain cancels.

Sat., Sep. 15, 9 a.m. FourSat., Sep. 15, 9 a.m. FourSat., Sep. 15, 9 a.m. FourSat., Sep. 15, 9 a.m. FourSat., Sep. 15, 9 a.m. Four-T-T-T-T-Trail Hikerail Hikerail Hikerail Hikerail Hikein Montana de Oro. in Montana de Oro. in Montana de Oro. in Montana de Oro. in Montana de Oro. Moderatelystrenuous, 10-mile loop hike, 2700 ft.gain, into many different areas of thepark. From Valencia and Oats Peaks,get excellent views of coastline andbackcountry, then descend alongCoon Creek and walk ocean bluffs.Bring adequate water, snacks, hat,sturdy shoes, and dress in layers forvariable weather. Ticks and poison oakpossible. Plants, animals, and areageology will be discussed. Meet atValencia Peak trailhead, 100 yardspast visitor center. Info.: Bill Waycott,459-2103 or [email protected].

Sat., Sep. 15, 9:30 a.m. Pt. SalSat., Sep. 15, 9:30 a.m. Pt. SalSat., Sep. 15, 9:30 a.m. Pt. SalSat., Sep. 15, 9:30 a.m. Pt. SalSat., Sep. 15, 9:30 a.m. Pt. SalRoad Hike.Road Hike.Road Hike.Road Hike.Road Hike. Your choice of a 5 or 10-mile hike, both moderately strenuous.5-mile hike, 2-hrs, ascends hill tolong views of coast, cliffs, and pristinebeach. 10-mile, 5-hrs., hike continuesdown to beach. Bring plenty of water,snacks, sunscreen, hat, and sweater incase of cool weather. Meet at maingate to Pt. Sal Park—end of BrownRd, 3.9 miles from Rt. 1. Info.:Andrea Ortiz, 934-2792.

Sat-Sun, Sept. 15-16. Bright StarSat-Sun, Sept. 15-16. Bright StarSat-Sun, Sept. 15-16. Bright StarSat-Sun, Sept. 15-16. Bright StarSat-Sun, Sept. 15-16. Bright StarService TService TService TService TService Trip. rip. rip. rip. rip. Assist BLM specialistMarty Dickes in Wilderness Areanorth of Ridgecrest, putting upbarriers, concealing illegal routes,placing signs. Sunday, long hikethrough wilderness area to CortezCreek and monitor a cherry-stemvehicle corridor. Early fall Ponderosaforest and chaparral! Contact leader:Craig Deutsche, 310-477-6670 orcraig.deutsche@ gmail.com. CNRCCDesert Committee.

Sun., Sept. 16, 9:30 a.m., Oso FlacoSun., Sept. 16, 9:30 a.m., Oso FlacoSun., Sept. 16, 9:30 a.m., Oso FlacoSun., Sept. 16, 9:30 a.m., Oso FlacoSun., Sept. 16, 9:30 a.m., Oso FlacoBeach Family Hike.Beach Family Hike.Beach Family Hike.Beach Family Hike.Beach Family Hike. Easy 2-mile hikealong boardwalk to beach, learningabout local plants and animals andplaying on the beach. Bring a picnic“brunch.” to eat at the beach. Meet atOso Flaco Beach parking lot ($4parking fee). From Hwy 1, go west onOso Flaco Rd. to the end. Info.:Andrea Ortiz, 934-2792.

Fri-Sun, Sept. 21-23. NationalFri-Sun, Sept. 21-23. NationalFri-Sun, Sept. 21-23. NationalFri-Sun, Sept. 21-23. NationalFri-Sun, Sept. 21-23. NationalPublic Lands Day in Black Rock.Public Lands Day in Black Rock.Public Lands Day in Black Rock.Public Lands Day in Black Rock.Public Lands Day in Black Rock.Service work in Black Rock DesertHigh Rock Canyon Immigrant TrailsNCA. All meals but lunch provided.Close to the date, for details, contactGraham Stafford, 775-686-8478 orgraham@ graham stafford .com.Great Basin Group-Toiyabe Chapter.

Sat., Sept. 22, 10 a.m. Guided WSat., Sept. 22, 10 a.m. Guided WSat., Sept. 22, 10 a.m. Guided WSat., Sept. 22, 10 a.m. Guided WSat., Sept. 22, 10 a.m. Guided Walkalkalkalkalkof Mission-Era San Luis Obispo. of Mission-Era San Luis Obispo. of Mission-Era San Luis Obispo. of Mission-Era San Luis Obispo. of Mission-Era San Luis Obispo. Doyou know where SLO’s first physicianlived, locations of the “hanging tree”and stagecoach stop? Find out and

more on an easy strollpast the Mission, several adobes, andold Chinatown. Hear stories of theearly days of SLO, the Chumash, andGold Rush pioneers. Familes wel-come. Meet at NW corner ofMonterey and Osos Sts. Leader: JoeMorris, 549-0355.

Sat., Sept 29, 9 a.m. Islay Road,Sat., Sept 29, 9 a.m. Islay Road,Sat., Sept 29, 9 a.m. Islay Road,Sat., Sept 29, 9 a.m. Islay Road,Sat., Sept 29, 9 a.m. Islay Road,Barranca and Ridge TBarranca and Ridge TBarranca and Ridge TBarranca and Ridge TBarranca and Ridge Trails Hike.rails Hike.rails Hike.rails Hike.rails Hike.Moderate 9-mile, 1800 ft. gain, hikein Montana de OroState Park. FromIslay Rd., we willascend Barranca Trailto great views of backcountry, then ontoRidge Trail to HazardPeak, with greatcoastline views.Bring lunch, water,and dress forweather. Ticks andpoison oak possible.Meet at parking lotacross from RidgeTrail trailhead, about3 miles from parkentrance. If you getto the visitor center,you have gone toofar. Possibility of eatsafter hike. Leader:Chuck, 441-7597.

Fri-Sun, Sept 29-30.Fri-Sun, Sept 29-30.Fri-Sun, Sept 29-30.Fri-Sun, Sept 29-30.Fri-Sun, Sept 29-30.National PublicNational PublicNational PublicNational PublicNational PublicLands Day in theLands Day in theLands Day in theLands Day in theLands Day in theCarrizo Plain.Carrizo Plain.Carrizo Plain.Carrizo Plain.Carrizo Plain. Visitthis scenic and

lesser-known national monumentwith optional hike to CalienteMountains on Friday. On Saturday, wewill fence a backcountry road toprotect resources. Sunday, tourhistoric, prehistoric, and geologicsites. Contact leader: Craig Deutsche,310-477-6670 or [email protected] CNRCC Desert Commit-tee.

Fall at Clair TFall at Clair TFall at Clair TFall at Clair TFall at Clair Tappaan Lodgeappaan Lodgeappaan Lodgeappaan Lodgeappaan Lodge

September 16-22: 50+ Outing - Ridge-September 16-22: 50+ Outing - Ridge-September 16-22: 50+ Outing - Ridge-September 16-22: 50+ Outing - Ridge-September 16-22: 50+ Outing - Ridge-top Rambles.top Rambles.top Rambles.top Rambles.top Rambles.

September 27 - 30. Plein Air Retreat forSeptember 27 - 30. Plein Air Retreat forSeptember 27 - 30. Plein Air Retreat forSeptember 27 - 30. Plein Air Retreat forSeptember 27 - 30. Plein Air Retreat forArtists.Artists.Artists.Artists.Artists.

September 28 - 30: Fly Fishing.September 28 - 30: Fly Fishing.September 28 - 30: Fly Fishing.September 28 - 30: Fly Fishing.September 28 - 30: Fly Fishing.

October 5 -7: Opera in the Mountains.October 5 -7: Opera in the Mountains.October 5 -7: Opera in the Mountains.October 5 -7: Opera in the Mountains.October 5 -7: Opera in the Mountains.

October 12-14: YOctober 12-14: YOctober 12-14: YOctober 12-14: YOctober 12-14: Yoga and Wine Toga and Wine Toga and Wine Toga and Wine Toga and Wine Tasting.asting.asting.asting.asting.

Located in Tahoe National Forest inthe Sierra Nevada. Spaces limited.Call (800) 679-6775. Cost for weekendactivities include 6 meals, 2 nightslodging and all of the activities, unlessotherwise stated.Got to http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/sierranevada/activities.htm for fees and details.

Documents

1 Santa Lucian • September 2012 Santa Lucian · San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 NONPROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT NO. 84 SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 The Moment of Truth (in labeling)