ELECTIONS : 1 Ventura Farmland Issue Passes : Politics: Three pro-business candidates are top vote-getters in tight City Council race. Property tax measures for libraries lose.

Ventura voters threw their support behind one of two slow-growth measures aimed at preserving large chunks of farmland around the city Tuesday, while also backing a slate of three pro-business candidates in a close fight for three vacant seats on the City Council.

At the same time, three property tax measures in the Ojai and Ventura areas written to bail out the county’s ailing library system fell far short of the two-thirds vote needed for passage.

A measure to limit campaign contributions in Ventura elections passed overwhelmingly, and a measure to allow the city to lease waterfront property for up to 55 years also passed.

In the City Council race, college administrator Ray Di Guilio and incumbent Councilman Jack Tingstrom led 10 other candidates in the returns. They were followed by financial consultant Jim Friedman. All were supported by the Ventura Chamber of Commerce.

Following the three leaders were attorney Donna De Paola-Peterson, the only woman in the race, and restaurant owner Charles E. (Buster) Davis.

With all precincts reporting, the final unofficial returns were 8,236 votes for Di Guilio, 8,101 for Tingstrom, 7,714 for Friedman. De Paolo-Peterson had 7,292 votes and Davis had 7,208. Some absentee votes remain to be counted today.

Di Guilio said his first-place finish came as a surprise. “I did not anticipate that I would be the No. 1 vote-getter,” he said. “Only 100 votes separate us. It is not a mandate but it is nice to be affirmed as the top vote-getter.”

Tingstrom was running for a second term on the council, while two other incumbents, Councilman Gregory Carson and Mayor Tom Buford, decided not to seek reelection. Tuesday’s winners will be sworn into office Dec. 4.

The other council candidates were marketing manager Stephen L. Hartmann, who had 3,962 votes; property manager Craig Huntington, who had 4,587 votes; software technician John S. Jones, with 1,464 votes; business consultant Brian Lee Rencher, with 1,041 votes; recycling supervisor Christopher T. Staubach, 2,462 votes; writer Keith Burns with 2,381 votes; and manufacturing engineer Carroll Dean Williams, 1,183 votes.

The two farmland-protection initiatives, measures I and J, mandated voter approval of any development on thousands of acres of farmland in and around the city of Ventura.

But, while voters approved Measure I, they were voting against Measure J by a slight margin.

Former Mayor Richard L. Francis drafted Measure J last spring to restrict development on farmland in and around the city. After the measure qualified, Francis took note of a similar law in Napa County upheld the California Supreme Court in March.

Because Measure J was legally untested, Francis and other slow-growth supporters decided to place a second initiative on the ballot modeled after the Napa law.

“Measure I was the second draft,” Francis said. “It is bulletproof and it has been sanctioned by the California Supreme Court.”

Measure J remained on the ballot because under state law a measure cannot be removed after it qualifies.

Francis said Tuesday night he was delighted that voters had backed Measure I for passage. “I am frankly boggled that there is such a split,” he said of the difference between the two measures.

Rex Laird, executive director of the Ventura County Farm Bureau, said farmers plan to challenge Measure I in court.

“We knew it was an uphill battle from the beginning,” said Laird. “Land-use issues are difficult to debate and that is why the proponents chose to spin it so it looks like apple pie. That kind of thing is difficult to undo.”

Measure J proposed limiting development on farmland forever unless zoning changes are approved by a majority of the city’s voters. Measure I targeted development on farmland until the year 2030 unless voters decide otherwise.

The two measures were promoted by slow-growth activists who wanted to wrest control of Ventura’s greenbelts from the council. But that group found itself outspent 5-to-1 during the campaign by a wealthy coalition of farmers and business leaders who raised about $126,000 to fight the measures.

In the final days before the election, opponents blanketed Ventura with political mailers that claimed the measures would create a vast bureaucracy and generate costly legal battles. Proponents of the measures protested that the mailers unfairly linked the farmland issue to crime and economic issues.

The three library measures in the Ventura and Ojai areas, all needing approval from two-thirds of the voters, were aimed at saving some library branches from closure and extending the hours at others.

In Ventura, Measure L proposed an increase of $35 in individual property tax bills to generate an additional $1.2 million annually for the city’s three branch libraries. Library goals included rescuing the Avenue Library from the brink of closure and nearly doubling the hours at Foster and Wright libraries.

In Ojai, Measure O proposed increasing annual property taxes on apartment units by $25 and on homes by $35 to generate about $100,000 for the local library.

Measure N asked residents in the county’s unincorporated areas between Ojai and Ventura to pay a $35 parcel tax, designed to generate $224,000 annually for the Meiners Oaks and Oak View libraries.

The defeat of the library measures drew mixed reactions from supporters of the campaign. “We raised almost $25,000 for this campaign,” said Barbara Swanson, president of the Friends of the Library in Ventura, speaking of the setback for Measure L. “If that doesn’t do it, I don’t know what will. I think we are going to have to let all the people who said, ‘No’ think of something.”

But Trish Cavanaugh, volunteer community relations manager for the county library services, was among those putting a positive light on the vote.

“I think that what is so impressive is that in this economic climate, we have half the people willing to take money out of their pockets to pay for libraries,” she said. “It’s a big statement.”

“We are seeing that the measure does have more than just simple majority support,” added Dixie Adeniran, director of the Library Services Agency. “But the two-thirds support for the tax that is needed is just formidable.”

The strong support for the campaign contribution limitation, Measure H, put voters behind limiting council candidates to a ceiling of $20,000 in total contributions if they chose to accept between $100 and $200. If they refuse to accept a $20,000 ceiling, they are limited to taking donations of under $100.

Currently, there are no limits on the amount of contributions to council candidates, who may accept donations over $200. In this year’s election, two candidates have already exceeded the $20,000 mark, with a final reporting deadline in January.

From a sampling of Ventura residents at the polls Tuesday afternoon, some voters indicated they generally are unimpressed with the field of council candidates. There were stronger emotions on the greenbelt and library issues.

“It’s an attack on property rights,” said Tim Hughes, a Ventura real estate broker who voted against the farmland preservation measures. “It’s a poorly written initiative.”

Hughes also voted against the library tax, but said that was a harder decision to reach.

“We’re already paying property taxes to fund the libraries,” he said. “Why should we pay more?”

On the other hand, Lisa and Robert Dunlap of Ventura said they voted in favor of the two greenbelt measures because they believe there is a need to preserve the city’s vast agricultural land.

But they also voted against the library parcel tax proposal.

“We’ve been taxed out,” Lisa Dunlap said.

*

Contributing to Times election coverage were staff writers Kenneth R. Weiss, Joanna M. Miller, Miguel Bustillo, Rodney Bosch and Ruben Macareno, and correspondents Nick Green, Eric Wahlgren and Paul Elias.