Moorpark Debates if Parks Will Close Should Measure Fail

There are those in Moorpark who fear that their city will become another Lake Elsinore.

In that Riverside County community of about 26,000, once-open parks have been fenced off with 6-foot-high chain-link fences. Its eight ball fields have been closed off. And park activities, such as the girls softball team’s annual all-star tournament, have been canceled.

The changes occurred after residents of Lake Elsinore voted in June against a measure to charge a tax to maintain parks and continue other city services.

Supporters of Moorpark’s Measure P--a park assessment initiative on Tuesday’s ballot--constantly point to the problems in Lake Elsinore as an example of what could occur locally.

“The opposition would like to say there’s no way they will ever close your parks and cut programs, but you can point and say: ‘Look at these communities,’ ” said June Dubreuil, who heads Moorpark’s Yes on Measure P committee. “They did close their parks and their programs did get cut. Money doesn’t grow on trees.”

Moorpark will ask its voters Tuesday whether they are willing to pay up to $68.50 a year to maintain city parks for the next 10 years. Measure P would go toward maintaining the city’s 13 parks as well as the Villa Campesina park, a small neighborhood park that was recently added as a city-maintained recreation site.

The city now spends $57 per home to maintain parks, $40 of which comes from property owners and $17 from the city’s General Fund.

Following passage of Proposition 218 in November, cities throughout the state began placing assessment measures on the ballot. The proposition required cities to get at least two-thirds voter approval to increase or continue most assessment districts.

In San Clemente, for example, the loss of that city’s assessment district has meant closing a 33-acre park, reducing maintenance at city beaches and parks, and removing equipment, such as picnic tables, rather than spend the money needed to erase graffiti.

Lake Elsinore, a city with a population similar to Moorpark’s 28,000 residents, failed to get its new tax passed in June, with only 60% voting in favor, instead of the 66.7% needed.

The reduced park funding--which was equal to $27 per homeowner annually--has been devastating for Lake Elsinore residents, said Teri Edelbrock, Lake Elsinore’s recreation and tourism manager.

“It took a long time to build a program and, with one vote, they were gone,” Edelbrock said. “For the youth leagues, there were not enough places to go. . . . They have scrambled to find places in the schools and they have no places to go at night. And people can’t picnic or have group functions.”

The city, however, has since earmarked $45,000 from its emergency fund to maintain parks on a limited basis. Next month, Lake Elsinore will put the measure before the voters again.

Yet opponents of Moorpark’s measure maintain that the Yes on Measure P committee is stretching to make the Lake Elsinore analogy. They argue that the Inland Empire city’s financial problems prior to the measure could have contributed to closure of the parks.

“That’s like comparing apples and oranges,” former Moorpark Councilwoman Eloise Brown said of the comparison to Lake Elsinore. “No, no. That’s like comparing cucumbers and apples.”

Lake Elsinore spent $22 million to build a baseball stadium, putting it in rocky financial straits. In addition, a flood several years ago drove away several thousand residents who had lived in mobile home parks, Brown said. The lake itself later got so dry from lack of rain that the city had to close some parks, she said.

“It’s not the failure of the measure that caused some of the [park] problems,” Brown said. “Some of the problems may have been the reason the measure failed. The problems go back prior to the ballot measure.”

Brown, a member of the Ventura County Alliance of Taxpayers, which has come out against the measure, recommends more closer scrutiny of Moorpark’s general funds. For example, she says, the city must be careful about waiving permit fees for charitable organizations because that translates to less money in the General Fund.

And some homeowners say they are just plain tired of paying for all the city taxes.

“The homeowners can’t stand much more,” said Edward Peters, a Moorpark resident who runs a 38-acre horse ranch for handicapped children. “Could you stand another 68 bucks on top of the other taxes you’re paying now? The fees are too great.”