By Peter Nichols
pnichols@tellingthetruth.com
WATSONVILLE -- Construction of the pyramids required the dedication and support of multiple generations of Egyptians.
Similarly, the effort to build a high school west of Highway 1 has called upon multiple ``generations'' of school district and city officials to carry the banner and hoist each seemingly immovable block higher and higher.
The school district identified the need to construct a third high school in the mid 1980s. In December of 1997, John Casey, superintendent of the Pajaro Valley Unified School District, inherited two high schools for which the term ``overcrowded'' does no justice.
He is the fourth superintendent to seek a solution. Preceding Casey were Anthony Avina, Jim Baker and Merrill Grant.
City officials, desperate for housing and employment opportunities have seen the school as a good fit for the Harkins Slough site. Development restrictions give the property limited value with respect to residential or industrial opportunities.
Carlos Palacios, City Manager since 1996 is the third such official to wrestle with the district's need for a suitable site for a third high school. He was preceded by Steve Soloman and John Radin.
And there have been over 20 different school board trustees and 21 different city council members since 1985.
The California Coastal Commission created the Coastal Zone as an area to be protected from intense development. The Edwards property, 117 acres on Harkins Slough Rd. with fresh water wetlands and farmlands lies within the city limits, and was included in that protected area.
In order to allow the city jurisdiction over that land, The Coastal Commission certified a Local Coastal Program (LCP) in 1983.
The parcels, owned by Ralph and Kathleen Edwards are zoned CZ, coastal zone, and EMOS, environmental management open space. Permitted uses include passive recreation, agriculture and aquaculture (fish farming).
Additional possible uses included ``non-nuisance'' industrial and residential, but development restrictions make use other than agriculture infeasible at this time, according to the district's appraisal report on the property. Making the conditional uses even more unlikely, they would require a finding that farming the land is not feasible.
It is these restriction that the city hopes to modify through their application for amendments to their LCP. The city hopes the matter will go before the commission during their March 14 to 17 meeting in Carmel.
Willie Yahiro, a long time Watsonville resident and PVUSD school board trustee since 1990 has been part of the process to build a new high school since 1984. He was then a member of a committee charged with identifying facility needs and growth projections for the district.
The restrictions to school construction have changed little since then.
``There isn't any easy answer,'' Yahiro said. ``You're either talking about farm land or you're into environmentally sensitive areas.''
The seeds of the current confrontation between school district and city officials on one side and those opposed to the project on the other were sewn in 1987 (see side bar) when the Harkins Slough site first appeared at the top of a list of the school district's possible high school locations. According to Richard Meyer, former District Director of School Construction, engineering studies were conducted on that site as early as the mid `70's to determine its suitability as a school location.
In 1987, then city manager Radin urged the district to abandon consideration of the site due to a host of concerns many of which centered around the area's eco-sensitivity and obvious permit hurdles.
In that same year, Daniel Gargas, airport safety inspector for Caltrans, evaluated the Harkins Slough Rd. site for its suitability as a school location. Due to the sites proximity to the main runway at Watsonville airport and the number and altitude of fight operations there, he determined the site to be ``incompatible with school development.''
Considering Radin's concerns and the Caltrans evaluation, the school board In 1988 voted to approve a site near Pinto lake _ one of three state approved sites located on or near Green Valley Rd _ in an area city planners had hoped to steer growth.
That decision created a fire storm of controversy leading to the emergence of a powerful neighborhood group, the Green Valley Action Committee (GVAC). In 1991, that group, led by Shelley Betz, argued against the Pinto Lake site due to environment, traffic, sewage and prime agriculture concerns.
That site was rejected the next year by a school board overwhelmed by the neighborhood response. Over 100 people packed board meetings and legal action was threatened if the board gave final approval to the site.
``There was tremendous pressure put on the board,'' said Yahiro, then in his first year as a trustee. The arguments against that site were similar to the ones being made against the Harkins Slough site, he said. But it was the presence of a determined opposition that caused the board to reject the site.
Siding with opponents, Yahiro cast one of six ``no'' votes dooming that effort to construct a third high school.
The school district, having seen the writing on the wall regarding its Pinto Lake option had already regrouped and formed the Superintendent's Alternative Site Committee in 1991. That committee included representatives from GVAC, Watsonville Wetlands Watch and PVUSD staff.
At about that same time as part of the site selection process, Gargas was asked to evaluate 11 sites for safety and noise issues relative to the airport. He wrote in a letter to the Department of Education that five sites were undesirable and that Harkins Slough Rd. was ``suitable for a school''.
Gargas said the site was farther from the runway than the one he evaluated in 1987 and the relative level of aircraft operations was actually decreasing during that time frame.
Later the committee was expanded to include representatives from the county Farm Bureau and County Planning Department, the city Development Director and the Executive Director of the Local Agency Formation Commission. After evaluating eight of the original 11 sites, the committee identified two preferred sites, Harkins Slough Rd. and Console with other sites offered as less desirable alternatives.
``The committee delivered a report to the school board,'' said Patrick McCormick, Executive Director of LAFCO and committee member. ``And the school board was responsible for the decision.''
``It was pretty clear that the school people and the city favored the Harkins Slough site,'' he said. ``And they were pushing the site, as others were pushing their favorites.''
While the committee was engaged in the evaluation process, Meyer _ representing PVUSD staff on the committee _ was quietly exploring the Harkins Slough Rd. site's feasibility in a series of ``informal'' and ``one-on-one'' meetings with Les Strnad, then a local Coastal Commission official. These conversations were described in a July, 1999 memo from Meyer to Casey.
According to the memo, those meetings were numerous and substantive, exploring _ in great detail _ measures that might make the district's preferred site a viable option. Discussions focused on mitigation measures involving traffic, playing field location, parking circulation and other matters.
And it was during these sessions that the concepts of habitat stewardship and environmental curriculum that have since been incorporated into the project as mitigation measures were first discussed.
The district, rightly or wrongly, was encouraged by Strnad who indicated that, though the process would be lengthy, it could result in approval by the Coastal Commission, according to the memo.
In June of 1993, the school board voted to build a new high school at the Harkins Slough site.
In July of that same year, in a letter to Meyer, David Loomis, Coastal Commission Assistant District Director who now makes his home in Montana, warned of ``potential for significant impacts on coastal zone resources'' regarding the proposed site and requested a meeting to discuss the potential impacts.
Loomis, whos children attended PVUSD schools had a long history of involvement in district matters including serving on the budget committee. Though he enjoyed a good working relationship with the district, and his Coastal Commission connection was known, he was never asked to participate in site selection.
It wasn't until a second request almost two years later, that a meeting was scheduled. It was then, during a PVUSD public meeting that the full scope of the commission's concerns were presented.
``I thought, here are a lot of facts and logic, but the district ignored them,'' Loomis said. ``We gave them the information, it was up to them how they used it.''
Later that summer, in another letter to Meyer, Loomis expressed dismay that the site selection process had been completed without input from the commission.
``That whole site selection process was flawed from the start,'' Loomis said.
``We wanted to participate in alternative analysis,'' said Tami Grove, commission deputy director. ``But we were never invited to participate.''
Maureen Hill (formerly Owens), a school district consultant who was the city's development director and represented the city on the selection committee contradicts Grove.
``Everybody was invited to participate,'' she said ``There were public discussions that the process was going on.''
She also denied that local commission staff's warnings about the site's suitability were being ignored.
``That's not true at all,'' said Hill. ``There was miscommunication,''
According to Meyer, the site selection process was being driven by the opponents of the Pinto Lake site, and because it was a working committee, those invited represented agencies and groups immediately involved. The Coastal Commission's input was not essential because they were in line for a jurisdictional review, he said.
``This committee was very inclusive _ on purpose.'' Yahiro said. They hoped to avoid problems that plagued the district's previous selection effort.
``It was very important to include the city and county planners,'' he said. ``But since Wetlands Watch (was included), there was no reason to have the Coastal Commission at the table.''
``We got very little input from the Coastal Commission during that process,'' McCormick said. ''In retrospect, it would have been better if we had more.''
The site selection process concluded with members reporting two top sites as equally desirable. They were the Harkins Slough Rd. site and the Console property, currently the Overlook Shopping Center anchored by Target.
Of the two preferred sites reported out of the committee, the size of the Console property was an issue _ only 35 acres versus the 50 acres the school board wanted. But McCormick proposed converting the adjacent property, Ramsay Park, to school use. The district could purchase the park, the city could purchase a new park site and security issues surrounding Ramsay Park could be solved while making room for the much needed high school.
That scenario had no legs.
``The Console property was too small,'' said City Manager Carlos Palacios. ``And it was needed for commercial development to support the city's tax base.''
Though the two sites were sent to the school board for consideration, Meyer and Hill, key players representing school district and city interests, only considered one to be acceptable _ Harkins Slough Rd. They each rated the Console site near the bottom of the eight evaluated, according to the district's EIR.
The selection of the Harkins Slough Rd. site started a lengthy and controversial process to determine the sites suitability within the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is that act that mandates an Environmental Impact Report.
After three years of Initial study and one year of writing the district's EIR, the district certified the document _ in May of 1997. It included analyses, feasibility studies, reports, maps, photographs, charts, tables and comments from agencies and individuals in book form over two inches thick.
After local environmental groups sued questioning the documents adequacy, the district decertified the original EIR and began work on a revised version designed to exceed CEQA standards.
That revised version, known as the REIR was certified and made public in June of 1998. The same groups sued the district, however, over similar but more narrowly focused issues. Santa Cruz Superior Court Judge Stephen McAdams ruled in favor of the district in April of 1999, confirming the adequacy of the document. That decision is currently on appeal.
As the Coastal Commission's March meeting approaches, efforts on the part of the city and the school district to broaden support within the community have reached a new level.
Assemblyman Fred Keeley, engaged in hush-hush negotiations, has successfully brought a local environmental group and a group opposing the city's desire to develop lands west of Highway 1 together with the project's supporters in a tenuous alliance.
The groups which have opposed the Harkins Slough Rd. site from the beginning have agreed to offer their support _ all the way to the Coastal Commission _ if the city council removes the adjacent Tai property as a residential option within their general plan, and if an enforceable agreement preventing future development west of Highway 1 can be arranged.
The local commission staff are looking at a similar binding agreement which they indicate will likely be a part of the LCP process.
So now, as the city and district continue their all-out effort to win support for the school and as Keeley tries to hold together his new coalition of opponents and supporters, and as the commission staff struggle to complete their report before their end of February deadline, the people of Watsonville and the PVUSD who have needed a new high school for 15 years, need only hold their breath a little longer _ maybe only 33 days _ to see if that next seemingly immovable block gets hoisted one level higher.
See also: