WESTCOUNTY : County Issue Agricultural land

A citizens group has started a drive to place a ballot measure before voters to stop development of agricultural land within Camarillo. Farmers say the measure is unfair because it dictates what they can do with their land. Should the remaining 1,600 acres of agricultural land located within the Camarillo city limits be preserved?

Cynthia A. Schutt, Concerned citizen Yes, I do feel that the land should be preserved. I don’t have the exact figures, but agricultural land in the Camarillo area is rated, and on a scale of one to 10 we’re at about three. Which means we have some of the richest soil within the whole United States. This is fertile soil needed for food in the future. I really think that if we pave over or sell to business people, it will be gone forever. In regard to the farmers, I understand this is a very heated issue. However, most of the farmland in Camarillo is leased by the farmers and therefore isn’t owned directly by the farmer, which I think is a fact that most citizens don’t really know. As far as the farmers rights, I think that is an issue we have to look into to a greater extent as citizens. I don’t think it is black and white. But once the land is destroyed we cannot regain it. Consider our eucalyptus trees. So many decisions were made to destroy them. These trees are monuments that can’t be replaced. I think the fields provide tranquility in the midst of traffic.

Fred C. Ferro, Farmer No. The land should not be preserved. It is a city and all the planning rules and regulations are forcing the development within the city and not allowing city-type improvements within agricultural areas. Besides they are just not compatible. Try spreading some chicken manure out there on a couple of hundred acres and see what local residents say. Also, there’s the problem of theft. The city population can do an awful lot of damage to an agriculture situation, and by the same token the noise and the harvesting when you get a lot of people working can disrupt the people living in their homes. If the land is within the city limits, it should go with what the planning commission says and be developed for city use. If the city or the residents want it green, they should buy it. But everything that has gone on so far has been based on economics, and it hasn’t worked out that way. That’s the way it is in the United States, and it’s a little hard to change now.

Rex S. Laird, Ventura County Farm Bureau executive director I don’t know if I can respond with a simple yes or no. Our board has not reviewed the ordinance. The concern that I have is that this appears, on the surface, to be a method by which you can circumvent the General Plan process. I do think it is inappropriate for land to be locked up without due process. This is an extremely complex issue and cannot be dealt with in simplistic terms. There are too many economic factors outside the jurisdiction and effect of the city of Camarillo that make it difficult for the city to be able to guarantee that a piece of property could remain economically viable. If the people want this to be a quasi park, then rather than an ordinance maybe they should be looking at an assessment district to purchase the land. Otherwise you have acquisition without just compensation. In other words, they are telling people we have decided that this is what is appropriate for your land and there is nothing you can do about it.

Bill Torrence, Ventura County League of Homeowners president Avery sincere yes. This land is probably one of the few places in the world where we have 40-foot topsoil, adequate water and one of the best climates for farming in the world. Agriculture is one of the main commodities in Ventura County and one of the largest income producers. It is far better to have farms growing food to eat than blacktop to walk on. I think the time has come for Camarillo and Ventura County to start looking for maintenance of what we have, instead of addition. I don’t think development is what is needed. I’ve been out here for 16 years. It was a nice rural area with prosperous farmers. Now they say they no longer can farm efficiently. The developers have created that problem. They’ve taken away from me and my family and our grandchildren and for many, many generations to come the dire need of agricultural land for future generations. Incidentally, I did some research and found that the commercial buildings in Ventura County have a 25% vacancy factor. The development I wouldn’t object to would be taking areas not farmable to develop affordable homes for people.

Maggie H. Erickson, Ventura County supervisor When agriculture land is within the city limits it is generally expected that at some point it will be developed, leaving the land outside the city limits to stay as agricultural land. That’s the General Plan of the county, and that’s the way the county has generally developed. In some cities like Ventura, they have a plan which keeps some of their farmland in a holding plan and allows development farther out, but still eventually it is expected that land will be developed. Whereas the land outside a city limit is generally expected to stay farmland for a long, long time. There are parts of the Oxnard plain which are very, very rich. It is probably unfortunate that the early settlers in Ventura County elected to begin their cities on some of the farmland. And when you look at the maps of the best farmland in the county, a lot of it underlies existing cities and the homes in which many of us live. I’d like very much to work with the people who are concerned with saving the farmland in Camarillo so that we can be effective in saving the best land in the county.