Front Page  »  

Can SLO County staff competently construct rural camping ordinance?

January 25, 2022

OPINION by CLIVE PINDER

Thank you for prioritizing this issue and placing on the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisor agenda for the Jan. 25 meeting. I have no personal dog in this fight but know of several neighbors who have had their income impacted by aggressive enforcement of these regulations.

I am writing to urge you to expedite this issue as it is causing unnecessary economic hardship and unnecessary bureaucratic red tape on an already over-burdened rural economy, especially for small agricultural and tourism businesses.

It seems absurd that staff who are already very familiar with the issues want to spend nearly $1 million of taxpayer money and take 18 months for an issue such as this.

Our county is already struggling with an overbearing local and state bureaucracy. I urge the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors to instruct the planning department to shorten the timeline for revising the “rural camping ordinance” to six months, and start with the industry-supplied draft.

In the meantime, while the review the ordinance, I also encourage county employees to stop serving ‘cease and desist’ orders on rural businesses who only have one or two camp sites on acreage that is more than adequate for such use. Let’s use common sense, avoid petty enforcement action and let taxpayers make a living so we can pay your salaries.

Born and raised in Nigeria of English heritage, Clive Pinter is married to a Paso Robles native and has lived in California for 15 years, the last five in Templeton. He is a passionate advocate for non-partisan journalism with a blog and podcast at www.insearchofsanity.org. 


Loading...
Related:


12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Hold on everyone. About to hit 2nd world status.


11

Clive,

Formally call your article disingenuous BS. “rural businesses who only have one or two camp sites on acreage that is more than adequate for such use”. Now let’s see what HipCamp is REALLY proposing,

3. Density. To be set by the Review Authority where Conditional Use Permit or Minor Use Permit approval is required, to a maximum of one unit per acre, which is also to be the maximum density for incidental camping of less than 10 units. Incidental outdoor stays are allowed under a Zoning Clearance and are limited to the following density. HIGHER DENSITIES may be authorized by a Minor Use Permit.

1-4.99 acre parcel: 2 campsites

5-9.99 acre parcel: 4 campsites

10-29.99 acre parcel: 10 campsites

30 acres+ : maximum 15 sites


7

Okie Dokie, yea allowing camping in a county filled 500k and up priced homes .Super fast way to destroy property values …but will the county drop the outrageous property taxes down to a fair price ? Nope county will just keeping raising property taxes and state its for more LEO involvement due to high crime in property area with campers etc etc .. Some of the vampires AKA campers will go on nightly safaris thru neighboring properties looking for trinkets and goodies to bring back to camp to sell at the local pawn shop


12

If done wrong, as in creating new entitlements to a already unsafe situation and or impacting a designated sensitive resource area, the county will spend much more of the limited taxpayer revenue stream on legal battles submitted by the many. Then again there is money to spend on litigation by not maintaining roads or providing mandated public services. An example is the millions already spent in the County Government’s attempt to strip private property owner’s of their water rights, no joke. Remember the song ” Back in the USSR”.


13

This would be a catastrophe in the making!!!

Think how much fun Dan DeVaul would have it it passes :)


12

I respectfully disagree with you. I am opposed to staff devoting time exploring the loosening of codes regarding camping on ranches until they have a handle on the existing illegal camping. A neighbor was cited March 26, 2021 by the County Hearing Officer and County Cannabis Hearing Officer Board for many code violations, of which included illegal camping on their 60+ acres. As of today, there is still illegal camping, and by the way it has no sanitary facilities. We have been told by the County that once cited for code violations the pace is governed by the violator. As Supervisor Ortiz-Legg commented today that the Board keeps putting more and more on the plate of the Planning Department without enough staffing. I am concerned about the abuse that will occur, such as my neighbor. If a property was permitted 10 sites, why not slip a few more in. Will the County be able to afford sufficient staff to continually monitor these sites for violations? In a perfect world everyone would follow the rules, but that’s not reality. I would predict that there will be abuse such as my neighbor and the County will not have the resources to clean up the mess. And it’s not a quick fix. Remember what the County told us…the violator controls the process.


26

Somehow I don’t think the picture used for the article would match up to what you would see with unregulated camping in the area.


34

Sure let illegal unpermitted campsites offer floaters in the creek facilities, litter, camp fires and substance abuse. No need to regulate this at all. Let it happen right next door! Fining the operators is the least that should be considered AND possible endangerment.


19

Hmm, hard pass on that. Random “camp sites” throughout the county is absolutely something the board should take a long hard look into. Easily abused and hard to regulate. I for one would vote against allowing it.


57

Seems like the entire county including random downtown doorways has become a camp site. Not much being done about that.


42

Yeah, so put them in rural areas … AKA future Big Sur fire sites


14
1 2