Council Foes of CSU Campus at Taylor Ranch Apply Pressure : Government: Among other demands, they ask for a study of alternative sites. A university official requests a meeting to discuss compromises.

After a week of delicate maneuvers to avoid a showdown over Cal State University’s plan to build a campus on the outskirts of the city of Ventura, both sides of a divided Ventura City Council remain far from reaching a compromise.

However, in a final attempt to iron out differences, CSU Vice Chancellor John Smart says he has requested a meeting with Councilman Todd Collart, author of a proposed city resolution that triggered the council split.

If adopted, the proposed resolution would make the city’s support of Taylor Ranch--the site for the university chosen by CSU--dependent on completion of an alternate site-selection study, done under the city’s supervision.

The city would, in effect, be withdrawing its official unconditional support for the Taylor Ranch site.

The council battle over the location of the future campus location has been brewing since January, when, in a wave of slow-growth sentiment, city voters elected three new council members who had received strong financial and political backing from avowed opponents of the Taylor Ranch development.

The City Council remains unanimous in support of a four-year university for Ventura County, but is deeply divided on where it should be located.

Four council members, including Collart, question CSU’s choice of Taylor Ranch and seem willing to support Collart’s resolution. They say that placing a university campus at that location would lead to development across the Ventura River, increase pollution, add to traffic and worsen the city’s acute water shortage.

They want to study site alternatives in other parts of the county before CSU does an environmental impact report (EIR) on Taylor Ranch--the next item on the university’s agenda.

Their opponents on the council claim that second-guessing the university’s choice could lead to the loss of the proposed campus--and along with it the cultural and academic benefits a university would bring to the region.

The EIR process, which by law includes a review of alternative sites, will determine whether Taylor Ranch is a viable site or not, they say.

Cal State is in the process of selecting a consultant to conduct the EIR. If the report is approved and then receives the support of the city, Smart said, the university will build a 12,000- to 15,000-student campus there.

Smart said he hopes Collart will compromise on some of the resolution’s demands to make it easier for the entire council to support and for the university’s board of trustees to digest.

“Hopefully, we can reach an agreement that’s acceptable to everyone,” he said.

But Collart’s council supporters say the resolution’s acceptance of Taylor Ranch as a possible alternative is compromise enough. It is CSU that should be more flexible in considering alternative sites, they say.

CSU officials have stated repeatedly--and Smart reiterated Friday--that they do not plan to build a university in Ventura County outside Taylor Ranch.

“I don’t like CSU’s ‘all or nothing’ attitude about the whole thing,” said Councilman Gary Tuttle, a critic of Taylor Ranch. “The city of Ventura will not be intimidated.”

Collart’s resolution demands that the university’s EIR be expanded beyond legal requirements to include a first phase entirely devoted to evaluating alternative sites.

“Once the first phase is competed,” the resolution states, “the trustees should . . . determine if the Taylor Ranch site is still the first choice. If it is not, the preferred site should become the focus of the remainder of the EIR. . . .”

But Smart said this condition--as well as others outlined in the proposed resolution--are unacceptable to the university’s Board of Trustees and could jeopardize the county’s chances to have a Cal State campus.

“People should not forget the trustees have conducted two site searches already that determined Taylor Ranch was the preferred site. While the EIR will consider alternative sites, the primary objective is to look at Taylor Ranch, not to pick alternatives,” Smart said.

Smart also objected to a clause in the proposed resolution stating that the city “should not be expected” to help pay for any of the costs of having the university built. “I think this question should be left open,” Smart said.

He said the university will not agree to another clause in the resolution calling for the university to surrender to the city “permit approval and conditional authority over development” if Taylor Ranch is confirmed as the university site.

“The city will be consulted, of course, but it is up to the trustees to decide how their university should be built,” Smart said.

Smart said passage of the resolution with the existing wording would hurt the chances of having a university built in the county, but he refused to speculate on whether it would lead directly to CSU dropping its plans altogether.

“It doesn’t help, but I don’t know if it will be fatal. I’ve given up on being a prognosticator,” he said.

Smart said he hoped that, through face-to-face meetings with council members, he could reach an agreement. But Tuttle said he does not believe there is much room for negotiation.

“I don’t think the city of Ventura can take a back seat while the university conducts an EIR, when the city is going to be the most affected party,” he said.

Council members Cathy Bean and Deputy Mayor John Villenueve made it clear during last Monday’s council debate that they, too, believe the university should give full consideration to site alternatives with strong input from the city before going ahead with a full-blown EIR on Taylor Ranch.

On the other hand, Councilman John McWherter said Friday that the resolution was unnecessary and that he supports the university’s right to conduct its EIR without the city’s involvement.

“I don’t think the City Council should determine how the EIR should be done,” he said. “After it is done, we will have our say in determining whether we agree with it or not. I just want to see it done as soon as possible, so I can make up my mind on whether I support the Taylor Ranch site or not.”

Mayor Richard Francis and Councilman Jim Monahan expressed similar concerns during Monday night’s intense discussion.

Collart, who was out of town all week and could not be reached for comment, had introduced his resolution during the council session. But, before a vote could be taken, he volunteered to send it back to the City Council’s university subcommittee for further review. His six colleagues quickly agreed, and the vote was temporarily called off.

Ventura City Manager John Baker said university subcommittee members Collard, Tuttle and Francis have not yet agreed on a date for a meeting to discuss the resolution further.

Baker confirmed that he had received a phone call from Smart requesting a meeting with Collart. He said he would try to schedule such a meeting as soon as possible. The council has not set a date on when it will reconsider the resolution.