It never ceases to amaze me how the powers that be, including the Board of Supervisors and the county Planning Commission, can abuse the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to punish some applicants and reward others. Two recent cases demonstrate the county’s bias when applying CEQA requirements and its own land use code requirements.
The first case is the Strauss wind energy project south of Lompoc. This project has been under construction for the last few years, but the developer forgot one critical process—obtaining a U.S. Fish and Wildlife incidental take permit to allow them to kill golden eagles, which have used the area for centuries.
Strauss (an affiliate of BayWa r.e. Wind LLC) developers requested a waiver of this condition so they could start operations because they didn’t submit their application in a timely manner.
The staff report provided recently to the county Planning Commission specifically stated: “A revised permit shall be processed in the same manner as a new conditional use permit: in compliance. The proposed project is being processed in the same manner as a new conditional use permit.”
But it wasn’t, the Santa Barbara County Land Use Code, Section 35.82.060, D 1 says: “After receipt of an application for a conditional use permit, the department shall review the application in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.” Since Strauss was requesting a change of an approved condition of approval, and specifically because it involved an environmental issue, it appears that county regulations would require a new CEQA review.
However, the Planning Commission and planning staff decided to change the rules by commission fiat on a 3-2 vote, instead of following long-established procedures to favor this project. They said, “Significant environmental impacts will be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. However, the requirement to obtain an ITP [incidental take permit] prior to operation is no longer feasible due to the potentially lengthy timeframe for ITP issuance and the urgency to commence SWEP [Strauss wind energy project] operations.”
Of course, this flies in the face of logic; even though it was perfectly feasible to obtain a permit, Strauss simply forgot to submit their application on time. And waiving federal law isn’t within the authority of the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors.
Santa Barbara County Planning Commission hypocrisy was on full display when another large project, the historic Rancho La Laguna property parcel split, didn’t get the same preferential treatment. Instead CEQA was used to deny a landowner the ability to develop their land. According to a Noozhawk report, they proposed dividing their 4,000-acre ranch into 160- to 605-acre “ranchettes.”
One concern was that their project would disrupt the agricultural economy and spirit of the Santa Ynez Valley. But it’s conceivable that parcels of the size being proposed could easily support continued ranch/farm operations. However, in the case of the Strauss wind energy project the ability to use the property as a ranch is no longer feasible, thus disrupting the agricultural economy and spirit of the Lompoc Valley.
Another concern was that the Rancho La Laguna project would conceivably endanger 57 rare wildlife and plant species, including the California condor, Environmental Defense Center officials said. Thus because of the potential environmental damage, they shouldn’t be allowed to proceed with their proposal.
A seemingly coordinated effort by the EDC and the Board of Supervisors to deny the project was approved by a judge in the Santa Maria Superior Court.
Here we should note that the EDC was silent concerning the Strauss project, which would kill any number of golden eagles as they flew through the blender-like 200-foot blades; the Audubon Society was not supportive of this move and opposed both waiving the ITP requirement and the county’s proposed new conditions to justify their conditional use permit condition of approval change.
It seems that when a project desired by environmental activists in government, who are naive enough to believe that they can save the Earth, is before them, the Planning Commission/Board of Supervisors can change the rules to accommodate the project without following established processes.
In the Strauss case, it was at least a direct violation of the county land use code, and at worst they aided and abetted a felony, which “taking” an endangered species without an incidental take permit is.
And who will stop them; they have been getting away with this behavior for decades in this county.
Ron Fink writes to the Sun from Lompoc. Send a letter for publication to [email protected].
