Council OKs Open Space Initiative as City Law

Giving the public more control over pristine public lands, the City Council decided early Wednesday to turn a hotly disputed open space initiative into law rather than place it before voters in November.

Council members voted 4 to 0 to enact Planning Commissioner Linda Parks’ open space measure, which will prevent any open space, golf course or park in Thousand Oaks from being zoned for another purpose without a vote of the people. Councilwoman Elois Zeanah was absent.

The council had declined to place the measure before voters just weeks earlier, as Mayor Andy Fox and council members Mike Markey and Judy Lazar questioned its motives and actual impact.

Although the three council members said they continue to have doubts about the adequacy of Parks’ initiative, they reversed field last week after county officials determined that Parks had gathered 8,852 valid signatures from registered voters--much more than she needed to get the measure on the ballot.

Council members had three options Wednesday: place Parks’ initiative on the fall ballot, commission a study on its effects or enact it as an ordinance. Without any discussion, about 1:30 a.m., the council chose the third--but not without some parting shots at Parks and her initiative.

“Although I have been opposed to this ordinance as not being well-written or serving the purpose of good government, it appealed to the people,” Lazar said. “And that alone is reason for us to support it.”

Parks said Wednesday afternoon that she was pleased to see her initiative achieve its goal. However, she was disturbed to hear some council members dismiss it as a do-nothing ordinance, she said.

“It doesn’t surprise me that the City Council would vote for this and then say, ‘But this doesn’t matter anyway,’ ” Parks said. “It shows they are not in support of this and never were.”

Like a farmland preservation measure passed by Ventura voters last year--which is a carbon copy of a Napa County law that has been upheld by the California Supreme Court--the Thousand Oaks ordinance prevents certain property from being used for anything other than what the city’s General Plan calls for.

Specifically, all land listed as a golf course, open space or park in Thousand Oaks’ General Plan has to stay that way until at least 2030, unless a majority of voters allow for a change.

But unlike Ventura’s preservation measure, Parks’ initiative mainly affects public land. About 95% of the open space in Thousand Oaks is publicly owned, with the remainder being the property of the North Ranch Homeowners Assn. and similar groups, according to City Planner Mark Towne.

However, privately owned golf courses--such as the North Ranch Country Club, the Sunset Hills Country Club and the Westlake Village Golf Course--would be affected by the ordinance, Towne said. A small portion of the Westlake Village Golf Course lies within the Thousand Oaks city limits.

*

The new measure will officially become law next week, when the City Council is expected to formally adopt it.

But will it accomplish what Parks and her supporters had in mind? Many detractors say no.

“I can tell you right now,” Markey said just before voting to enact the ordinance, “I don’t think this is going to affect any parks.”

Most of the 14,000 acres of open space within Thousand Oaks is owned by the city, the Conejo Recreation and Park District, or the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency, a joint body. But although within city limits, some of the land cannot be controlled by the city, according to the government officials who preside over it.

Tex Ward, the park district’s general manager, said the agency has never developed any of its parks or open space, and has no intention of doing so. But he noted that as a separate agency, the district has the legal right to ignore the zoning restrictions of Thousand Oaks’ General Plan and proceed with development in certain cases--as long as it has a four-fifths vote from its elected board.

“The park district does have some authority here, although we have never chosen to exercise it,” Ward said.

Thousand Oaks City Atty. Mark Sellers agreed: The park district can override the open space preservation ordinance, but only in limited circumstances, such as by building a recreational center or similar facility necessary for its operations. Sellers said he is still unclear on how the ordinance would impact the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency.

“They [the park district] couldn’t say, ‘With a four-fifths vote, we’re going to make this industrial land,’ ” Sellers said. “What it means is they have veto power over things that have to do with their reason for existing, parks and recreation. I don’t see a lot of overrides.”

*

However, Sellers described the measure as misguided. Because it focuses on Thousand Oaks, yet seeks to place controls on the park district, it puts the city in a difficult position, he said.

“We’re making a big thing out of something that is really not an issue,” he said. “There is no evil force out there trying to develop our parkland. If they [Parks and her supporters] want to bind the park district, they should have binded the park district. This only binds the city.”

Under the ordinance, the City Council will only have the authority to change the zoning of parks, open space and golf courses if it is determined that not doing so would amount to an unconstitutional taking of someone else’s property.

However, Sellers said such violations of property rights--especially with the Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency and the park district--may become common under the new ordinance.

“The real issue of uncertainty is this: What if the park district has surplus land? This has to have some kind of use,” Sellers said. “If the park district says, ‘We can’t sell this to anyone else, you have in essence taken our property,’ then we would have to take some action.”

Councilwoman Jaime Zukowski, a strong supporter of the ordinance, said she finds such opinions unsettling. She wants a thorough examination of the measure to determine its impact once and for all.

“I think this is going to be a rude surprise to the public if this is the case,” she said of the opinions of Sellers and Ward. “We have to make this clear, and we need to do it right away.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

FYI

* Thousand Oaks’ new open space preservation measure will prevent any open space, golf course or park in Thousand Oaks from being zoned for another purpose without a public vote.

Like a farmland preservation measure passed by Ventura voters last year, this ordinance prevents certain property from being used for anything other than what the city’s General Plan calls for.

Specifically, all land listed as a golf course, open space or park in Thousand Oaks’ General Plan has to stay that way until at least 2030, unless a majority of voters approve a change.

But unlike Ventura’s preservation law, this measure mainly affects public land. About 95% of the 14,000 acres of open space in Thousand Oaks is publicly owned, with the rest the property of the North Ranch Homeowners Assn. and similar groups.

Under the ordinance, the City Council only has the authority to change the open space zoning if it is determined that not doing so would amount to an unconstitutional taking of someone else’s property.