FIRESTONE ACCUSED

Conflict of Interest Charges Stop Board in Tracks

by Ethan Stewart

On a day when it seemed more than likely that the Santa Barbara
County Board of Supervisors would pass the proposed Uniform Rules
changes — the ordinances that govern some 550,000 acres of
privately owned local land currently under the Williamson Act
contract — late-hour accusations claiming conflict of interest on
the part of 3rd District Supervisor Brooks Firestone forced the
board to once again punt the controversial decision. The debate
over the Uniform Rules changes — which would, among other things,
allow guest ranches, one or two additional family homes, and
expanded support facilities on the traditionally
development-restricted, tax-sheltered Williamson Act land — has
been a hot-button issue throughout the county in recent weeks.
Opponents have called for more environmental review, given the fact
that the county is currently considering at least 19 other
ag-related policy changes, and supporters have claimed that the
changes are necessary for the financial survival of family
farmers.

Despite the loud pleas from the public to delay, supervisors
Firestone, Joni Gray, and Joe Centeno were all prepared to vote on
and pass the long-simmering ordinance changes today when the
Environmental Defense Center’s Cameron Benson served the board late
Monday afternoon with a 13-page letter detailing Firestone’s
possible conflicts of interest and requesting that the supervisor
recuse himself from the vote. A closed-door session with county
counsel ensued, resulting in the decision that “For the interest of
being clean and aboveboard” (as he put it), Firestone should
abstain from any discussion or action on the issue, pending closer
examination by the Fair Political Practices Commission. Thus, with
the majority lost, supporters of the rules changes begrudgingly
backpedaled on their previous “pass it now” stance and called for a
nearly two-month delay until late February.