Marks Ranch: Park or Tract? A citizens'' land-use panel for the Toro area will vote on a proposal to build mini-mansions on Marks Ranch at its upcoming meeting.

There are only two agenda items scheduled for the four-hour Aug. 5 meeting-but that doesn''t mean it will be an early night.

At the meeting, which begins at 4pm at the Cypress Community Church, the Toro Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) will consider two subdivision proposals. One would subdivide about 890 acres on Highway 68 and Reservation Road. The second hotly contested proposal would build 275 homes on Marks Ranch.

St. John''s College owns the 800-acre property, located between Toro Park and the Las Palmas Ranch subdivisions. The college wants Monterey County to rezone the land so that developer Mike Fletcher can build expensive homes.

It''s zoned "quasi-public," the designation given to military bases, parks and other open spaces.

In a letter to the County, Las Palmas developer Fletcher said he would like the entire property re-zoned.

A local group, Citizens to Save Marks Ranch, recently presented 3,624 signatures to the Board of Supervisors, urging county officials to keep the land''s zoning as open space.

After the meeting, the committee''s recommendations will be forwarded to the County Planning Commission.

Water Board: Dead or Alive?

On Aug. 2, the Monterey Peninsula Water District''s attorney will ask a Superior Court judge to dismiss a lawsuit seeking to throw out the ban on water credit transfers.

MPWMD Attorney David Laredo says he will ask the judge to dismiss the case "because we believe that the statute of limitations ran out."

According to state law, the cities had 35 days from the time the ban took effect to file a lawsuit. The MPWMD''s new law eliminating water credit transfers took effect on March 30. The cities-Seaside, Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove and Sand City-filed suit on May 28. The Peninsula cities'' lawsuit contends that the district violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Laredo has repeatedly said that the ban does not constitute a "project" and therefore does not require an environmental study under state law.

-Jessica Lyons