A Generous Gift for Hopes Closet

COMMUNITY NEWS A Generous Gift for Hopes Closet

Hopes Closet, the nonprofit resale children’s shop at 2557 Soquel Drive, Santa Cruz, is celebrating its 10th anniversary — and providing 20,000 “bundles of hope” to children in need.

Board member Arne Croce announced the nonprofit recently acquired a new washer/dryer with a price tag of $2,400, thanks to a $2,000 donation from Omega Nu.

Debbie Baker, owner of Baker Brothers Appliance in Watsonville, paid the sales tax and provided free delivery, installation, and pick-up/disposal of the old unit.

All of the clothing donated to Hopes Closet is washed before given to families in need or being put out for sale to the public.

Winter wear, snow jackets and snow boots, are now in stock.

Store hours are: 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesday-Friday and 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday.

In October, the nonprofit hosted an open house for volunteers, looking for people who like to organize, work with people or put together cute outfits for children. For information email Volunteer@HopesClosetsc.com.

On Oct. 28, the nonprofit posted a request on its Facebook page, requesting clean and lightly worn clothing for boys and girls sizes 4, 5, and 6.

The donation center is open 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday and Wednesday and 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday. n

A new washer/dryer makes them smile, left to right, Sue Bird, Hopes Closet volunteer, Sisi Belcher, Hopes Closet volunteer and Omega Nu alum, Shelley May, Hopes Closet store manager, Charlie Flores, Baker Brothers Appliance, Linda Walls, Hopes Closet volunteer, and Adam Croce, Hopes Closet donation associate.

“Kaiser Traffic Issues” from page 10

After examining a city’s authority to close streets VC 21101 and its Authority to regular traffic VC 21100, the court held neither statute would authorize the erection of traffic barriers by a city.

The county counters that subsequent amendments to VC section 21101 govern the instant case. We agree.

Immediately following the Rumford decision, VC section 21101 was amended, inter Alia, by the addition of subdivision (f).

Section 21101 subdivision (f) provides in relevant part: “Local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, May adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution on the following matters…(f) Prohibiting entry to, or exit from, or both, from any street by means of islands, curbs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan adopted pursuant to article 6 (commencing with section 65350) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code.

In amending section 21101, the Legislature stated its intention as follows: “The recent California Supreme Court decision in Rumford v City of Berkeley (S.F. 24239) may make some existing traffic control devices illegal. In order to keep existing traffic control devices operational until a permanent solution is developed, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.” (Stats. 1982 ch.749, S 8 page 2968).)

The amendment also included a sunset provision effective Jan. 1, 1984. However in 1983, the sunset provision was deleted and the following sentence was added to subdivision (f): “The rules and regulations authorized by this subdivision shall be consistent with the responsibility of local government to provide for the health and safety of its citizens.” (Stats. 1983, ch. 291 S 5, p. 867.)

Here the evidence establishes that the County adopted the Gross Road Plan to address traffic congestion in the area at issue. The County’s General Plan was subsequently amended to include this traffic plan. Both plans include a barrier on 40th Avenue at the intersection with Deane’s Lane.

Since the City has raised no issue as to whether the County has complied with various statutory provisions in its adoptions of its General Plan, we conclude the county was authorized by Vehicle Code Section 22101 subdivision (f) to maintain the traffic barrier in question.

Relying on the Legislature’s statement of intent in 1982, the City first argues subdivision (f) was not a repudiation of the Rumford holding barring traffic barriers, but rather an attempt to address the legality of other traffic control devices. We disagree.

The plain meaning of a statute should be followed where the language is clear. (Great Lakes Properties, Inc., v., City of El Segundo (1977) 19 Cal.3d 152, 155.) Here the statute clearly provides that local jurisdictions may maintain “traffic barriers” under prescribed circumstances.

The City next argues that the General Plan makes no reference to a barrier at this intersection. While the map include in the General Plan does not specifically refer to a “barrier,” it is clear that a barrier was intended at the location in question.

There are lines across both 40th Avenue and Gross Road just north of Clares Lanes, thus indicating the presence of barriers at these intersections.

While the maps in the record consistently place a barrier at the intersection of Clare’s Lane and Gross Road, none of the other maps in the record place a barrier at 40th Avenue and Clare’s Lane.

The barrier at issue is located at 40th Avenue and Deane’s Lane.

Deane’s Lane runs parellel to Clare’s Lane and is located immediately north of Clare’s Lane and thus the mark indicating a traffic barrier at 40th Avenue and Deane’s Lane was included in the General Plan.

We find the evidence sufficiently shows that the traffic barrier at 40th Avenue and Deane’s Lane was included in the General Plan.

In addition to the obvious error in the drafting of the map, the County, as previously discussed, enacted an ordinance designed to implement the Gross Road Plan. The ordinance stated that its purposed was to bring the area “into greater conformance with the Santa Cruz County General Plan and its circulation element.”

Since the Gross Road Plan included the barrier now at issue, we can only conclude the General Plan did as well.

The judgment is affirmed. n

SPECIALIZING IN Residential Repaints & Custom Homes Homeowners Associations Property Managers WINTER SPECIAL

If we paint your interior and/or exterior by December 31, 2021 we will buy the paint.