What's New?AboutIncorporationProjectsResourcesJoin
     
 
 

 
 
 


05/08/08

Judge rules in favor of Carmel Valley Forum, finds LAFCO “abused its discretion” in ordering an unnecessary EIR before Carmel Valley can vote on creating a Town.  Read Judge Lydia Villareal’s decision. (pdf)

3/6/07

The Carmel Valley Forum issues a press release announcing that it is filing a lawsuit against LAFCO for its denial of the right to vote to the citizens of Carmel Valley.

(full press release)

(actual CVF complaint filed regarding LAFCO)

(exhibit A)

(exhibit B)

(exhibit C)

(exhibit D)

01/15/07

Carmel Valley Magazine January Issue features article on incorporation.

01/04/07

Read CVA's comments on the recent traffic study of Carmel Valley Road. "The primary conclusion we draw from these data is that traffic in Carmel Valley is nearly at saturation."

See the map below to understand why it is only going to get worse with existing approved or planned projects:

10/19/06

Monterey County Herald article:
INCORPORATION GROUP SAYS EIR DEMAND ILLEGAL.
A representative for the Carmel Valley Forum on Friday called a recent decision requiring a full environmental review for proposed incorporation of Carmel Valley "arbitrary and capricious, and therefore illegal."

(read the full article)

10/29/06

Commentary in the Monterey County Herald says:

"Never before in California's history had a county's LAFCO rejected an executive officer's recommendation that incorporation be sent to the voters."

"Monterey County LAFCO set two other ignoble state records in its handling of Carmel Valley incorporation: the longest time ever to process an incorporation application, and the highest fees ever collected from proponents."

(read the full commentary)

10/29/06

Article in The Monterey County Herald:

THE LONG, LONG WAIT
Residents shocked by panel's decision to put off vote on incorporation

"Most people view what happened last week as a fake issue to keep incorporation off the ballot," valley resident John Delessio said. "What you've had is a massive movement to say, 'let us vote.' That is our right. Stop standing in the way."

"Mike McMillan said the sheriff's department should be alerted about a crime. The people of Carmel Valley were robbed of $150,000 and thousands of hours. LAFCO should give the money back," said McMillan.

(read the full story)

10/26/06

From the Monterey County Weekly:

"On Monday, Oct. 23, LAFCO commissioners heard testimony from incorporation proponents demanding that they reconsider last week’s decision and allow the proposal to go to a public vote. Instead, commissioners railed against the opinion that they are trying to kill the residents’ right to vote."

(read the full story)

10/21/06

"Vote on C.V. an example of arrogance", says the Herald's View.

"When it comes to land use, Lou Calcagno and Jerry Smith apparently have decided that public opinion doesn't matter. They're willing to prevent public votes on big issues, no matter what it takes, no matter how bad it looks.

The latest example of official arrogance came Wednesday when the two county supervisors, joined by three others on the Local Agency Formation Commission, chose not to let the people of Carmel Valley decide whether to incorporate.

In a stunning reversal of a decision 10 months earlier, Calcagno, Smith, commissioners Ralph Rubio and Tom Perkins and alternate Matt Gourley, filling in for absent Anna Caballero, voted to require a full environmental impact review. That gives development interests and other incorporation opponents time to create other obstacles in case the $500,000 cost of performing the study doesn't kill the incorporation effort outright." (read the full editorial)

 

10/20/06

LAFCO voted 5-2 late Wednesday night to order an environmental impact report, further prolonging a process that is now six years old. The vote came 10 months after the same board approved a negative declaration that such a report was necessary. Though it was not an official decision to deny incorporation, the vote severely handcuffs incorporation proponents and delays the vote for at least another year because preparation of an EIR takes at least that long. Read the coverage by The Monterey Herald.

10/9/06

Report on the incorporation of The Town of Carmel Valley is available on the LAFCO website. Report reaffirms that the Town of Carmel Valley will be fiscally viable.

9/28/06

Great News! Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law AB 1602 which will significantly add to the already viable financial health of the new Town of Carmel Valley! read more

7/14/06

Representative Sam Farr sends a letter to LAFCO to "...urge LAFCO to exercise its discretion to waive fees and allow the proposed formation of the new Town of Carmel Valley to proceed to a vote."

7/3/06

CVA sends letter to LAFCO regarding the misleading "surveys" conducted by anti-incorporation activists. Appendix A (pdf), Appendix B (pdf), Appendix C (pdf), Appendix D (pdf)

6/9/06

LAFCO today published the revised Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis. It forecasts a healthy fiscal future for the Town of Carmel Valley. Read the whole report or just the Conclusions (Chapter 2).

6/24/06

The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) made an important decision pertaining to incorporation. Cognizant of all the delays it has caused, LAFCO voted unanimously to expedite the petition to incorporate Carmel Valley with an eye toward putting the measure on the November ballot.

04/22/06

Read the letter to the Carmel Pine Cone from Lew Bauman, County Chief Administrative Officer, regarding the facts about road maintenance costs in Carmel Valley. Read Balderdash! to find out about other facts that shed light on some of the misinformation surrounding incorporation of The Town of Carmel Valley.

Balderdash! insert in the Carmel Pine Cone dispels the misinformation about forming a Town of Carmel Valley. (pdf)

 

Results from 2005 CVA member survey regarding forming a Town of Carmel Valley(pdf)

LandWatch Monterey County Press Release Endorses Carmel Valley Incorporation

 

Adobe Reader software required for pdf files

The case for incorporation was laid out by CVA president Glenn Robinson in the following op-ed published by the Monterey County Herald. Incorporation has been strongly endorsed both by the general membership of CVA and (unanimously) by its Board:

Printed in the Monterey County Herald January 23, 2005

THE FATE OF A VALLEY
GLENN E. ROBINSON

(emphasis and links added)

A recent independent analysis shows that a Town of Carmel Valley would be financially feasible. This study demonstrates that Carmel Valley can easily afford to incorporate, with no increases in taxes or fees. There are three main reasons why we should incorporate now.

• Preserve rural character

Incorporation is our last, best hope to slow the overdevelopment of Carmel Valley. There is a development gold rush currently under way here that is overwhelmingly opposed by local residents. The Board of Supervisors continually ignores the views of our community. In 2004 alone, the supervisors approved a huge 64,000-square-foot self-storage facility and a 78-unit development, both of which were strongly opposed by our neighborhoods, the Carmel Valley Land Use Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission and our own supervisor, Dave Potter. But both were approved by a 4-1 vote by the supervisors. A near-doubling in size of the Safeway store in the floodplain of the Carmel River was likewise approved by the Planning Commission over the objections of the two commissioners who represent our community. Fast approaching are a 280-house subdivision at Rancho Cañada, and a 172- unit subdivision at Mid-Valley. Does anyone seriously doubt the county won't approve these inappropriate and unwanted developments as well?

Irresponsible county land-use decisions will generate more than 15,000 new car trips per day in Carmel Valley in the years ahead from already-approved projects. This near-doubling of traffic will inevitably lead to severe congestion and the concomitant ruination of some local businesses. Will people want to visit Carmel Valley if they must spend most of their days in traffic gridlock? Carmel Valley is not the first bucolic and unincorporated community in California to face enormous development pressures.

The only communities that have successfully fought these pressures were ones that incorporated in order to make their own land-use decisions. They include Lafayette, Tiburon, Monte Sereno, Danville, Portola Valley, Moraga, Los Altos Hills and Orinda -- all communities similar to Carmel Valley. Indeed, most incorporations in recent decades have been by communities trying to fight overdevelopment, including California's most recent incorporated town, Goleta.

• Demographics and democracy
The urbanization of Carmel Valley goes beyond the supervisors' pro-development leanings. Simple demographics tell us that the interests of Salinas Valley will determine our fate forever if we do not declare independence. Carmel Valley used to have its own supervisor. Carmel Valley's stable population of 12,000 now represents only 1/7th of the 5th District, or 1/35th of the Board of Supervisors -- and, due to rapid population growth elsewhere in the county, that small percentage is fast disappearing. According to the 2000 census, Monterey County has the third-fastest growing population in the state of California. Most of that growth is occurring in the Salinas Valley. Demographic weight means political power. The needs of the Salinas Valley, combined with its demographic power, lead to a structural bias that favors development in order to generate tax revenues that can be used in the Salinas Valley. The simple logic of demographics will invariably further urbanize Carmel Valley while stifling our ability to stop it. Incorporation will resurrect our voice, thereby enhancing our democracy and our community.

• Better local governance
A third reason to incorporate is to keep local tax dollars at home, thereby increasing government accountability to our residents and providing more responsive local governance. The total annual budget projected to run the Town of Carmel Valley represents only about 1 percent of the county's total budget, meaning that incorporation will have a neutral financial impact on the county. Yet incorporation will give the people of Carmel Valley a tangible connection between the taxes we pay and the services we are provided.

To save the best in our community, Carmel Valley must incorporate now.

Donate to Incorporation Advocacy

  
   

 

  
 
  hosted by mbay.net