Camarillo Council Tentatively Backs Slow-Growth Plan

A majority of City Council members said Tuesday they will support a proposed measure to limit growth in the city.

The proposal, which could be adopted by the City Council or put before voters, is one of several such measures in Ventura County inspired by a proposed countywide measure known as Save Our Agricultural Resources, or SOAR.

The Camarillo measure--drafted by an architect of a similar law enacted in Ventura--would require voters’ approval to develop any agricultural land or open space that is annexed to the city.

City Council members will review the Camarillo ordinance at a study session tonight and then may refer it back to staff members for revisions before taking action on it next month.

“It’s what people come to us and tell us they want all the time,” Mayor Charlotte Craven said.

Craven believes voters would support the measure overwhelmingly.

Councilmen Mike Morgan and Bill Liebmann have also expressed support for the ordinance. But Councilman Kevin Kildee said he is undecided, and Councilman Stan Daily could not be reached for comment.

Similar growth limits, inspired by the proposed countywide SOAR initiative, are under consideration in three other Ventura County cities: Oxnard, Moorpark and Simi Valley. All plan to launch petition drives in March to gather signatures for the November ballot.

*

Voters in Ventura approved that city’s slow-growth initiative in 1996.

Unlike the Ventura law, which applies within city limits as well as to annexations, the Camarillo measure would only require voters’ approval for development of annexed land.

Richard Francis, author of the Ventura initiative as well as Camarillo’s proposed measure, said he drafted a less restrictive law in keeping with the philosophy of the countywide growth-control movement.

“With a lot of soul-searching and discussion with elected officials, farmers, moderates and radicals, we’ve decided that the better plan--as long as we’re talking about a countywide vision--is to allow the cities to grow in their own unique fashion,” he said.

Camarillo Councilman Liebmann, who is also part of the county’s Agriculture Policy Working Group committee, agreed.

“If we accept the proposition that some amount of growth in this county is inevitable, then in order to preserve agricultural land we have to make sure the growth occurs within the established cities,” he said.

*

“But because there is so much diversity among the cities in this county, I don’t think it’s appropriate that we have a one-size-fits-all solution,” Liebmann said.

The countywide measure, he said, “sets the overall ground rules which will preserve the agricultural land and open space, but allows each individual community to make land-use decisions in the way they have traditionally done it.”

Meanwhile, the city continues to consider projects that would develop some of the 1,310 acres within Camarillo city limits that are zoned as agriculture.

City Council members will review a plan tonight to convert nearly 340 acres of farmland between the Ventura Freeway and Pleasant Valley Road into a subdivision complete with a school, parks, shopping center and hotel.

If they decide the Camarillo Park and Village project has merit, they will send it to the Planning Department for an environmental review.

Another project the city has at hand is the request from the McGrath family to annex farmland south of the Ventura Freeway and west of Wood Ranch Road so they can proceed with development plans.

That plan calls for 25 to 30 acres of a 200-acre stretch of farmland to be converted into a 379-square-foot agriculturally themed commercial center over a five- to 10-year period.

The planning department is preparing the application for processing and will be soliciting proposals to do the environmental documents.

*

Neither of these projects, however, would be affected by a SOAR-like ordinance in Camarillo. The Camarillo Park and Village project is within city boundaries and the McGrath project has always been scheduled for annexation and development.

To be effective, the city and county ordinances must contain the same language, Liebmann says. One conflict that must be resolved is whether a vote on proposed development would occur before or after annexation.

Liebmann says he has already met with Francis to discuss changes and expects a new draft to be brought back to the City Council by next month.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Possible Routes for Measure

A proposed city ballot initiative that would limit growth could take one of three routes to become law in Camarillo:

* The Camarillo City Council could adopt the ordinance. This would be quicker and cheaper than putting it on the ballot, but would make the law subject to change by future councils.

* Proponents could prepare an initiative petition and circulate it for the estimated 4,500 voter signatures needed to place it on the November ballot. This route would make the law subject to change only by voters, but would put the proponents, opponents and the public through a potentially divisive and expensive campaign.

* Proponents could prepare their initiative, gather the signatures and then request the City Council adopt it as an initiative without putting it before the voters. This would require opponents to ask voters if they want to repeal the law and require a four-fifths vote of a future council to change.