Simi to Put SOAR Measure on Fall Ballot

The Simi Valley City Council on Monday night voted to place a local SOAR initiative on the fall ballot, and Oxnard leaders tonight could strengthen a similar growth-control initiative they’ve already agreed to place on the November ballot.

Simi council members voted unanimously to give residents a chance to vote on the Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources (SOAR) measure, saying it was the will of their constituents.

“I would expect nothing less of this body,” said Councilwoman Barbara Williamson. “It would be something totally out of character for us to ignore the voters.”

The council added an amendment, however, that would void the local initiative in the event that a countywide SOAR effort fails to pass.

The proposed changes in Oxnard’s measure--adding new greenbelts outside the city--have won the support of SOAR advocates, who say it goes beyond the city’s original version and will place even more restrictions on growth.

But city officials say it is unclear how much control Oxnard can wield outside its city limits to create protected swaths of farmland.

“Frankly, I’m not sure if it would even be lawful,” said City Atty. Gary Gillig of the updated initiative championed by Mayor Manuel Lopez. “This is a highly conceptual idea.”

Meanwhile, three other cities are scheduled this week to consider placing the farmland preservation measure on the ballot in a bid to head off a legal challenge that could ground the initiative before it goes before voters.

The City Council in Santa Paula also discussed the SOAR initiative Monday night, with their counterparts in Thousand Oaks and Oxnard scheduled to follow suit tonight. The Moorpark City Council will discuss the matter Wednesday.

A split county Board of Supervisors placed the countywide version of the initiative on the ballot earlier this month.

The county measure would forbid rezoning agricultural land for development without a vote of the people. The city measures would set strict boundaries for each community and forbid expansion into nearby farmland without a popular vote.

The SOAR initiative gathered more than double the number of signatures necessary to place it on the ballot, but lawyers representing the Libertarian Party have sued to scuttle the measure, contending that the petitions violated state law.

The campaign would remain alive for this fall if city officials can be persuaded to place it directly on the ballot.

Simi Valley council members supported doing just that.

“What the petition has showed is that people want the opportunity to vote on this,” Councilman Paul Miller said Monday afternoon. “And if people want to vote on this, then they should be allowed to.”

Backers are hoping similar attitudes in other cities prevail.

“We’re very optimistic they’ll want to avoid a special election because there’s no doubt we will get the signatures to go that route,” said SOAR spokeswoman Lisa Burton. “Hopefully we’ll all avoid those costs and they’ll do the right thing.”

That looks to be the case in Thousand Oaks, where a majority of council members said last week they will vote to place the issue on the ballot.

Things are more problematic in Moorpark and Santa Paula, where support among government officials for SOAR has been weaker. In Moorpark, SOAR could derail a huge planned housing development; in Santa Paula the initiative could do the same to a planned expansion of the city limits as the community updates its General Plan.

SOAR supporters have left open the possibility of gathering more signatures if necessary to place the initiatives on the ballot.

Moreover, a court hearing set for Thursday may resolve legal questions surrounding the validity of the signatures on the original petitions, said campaign organizer Richard Francis.

Even with its amendment that could kill the measure, Francis said his group commended the Simi Valley council for placing the issue before the voters.

“It’s highly unlikely that it would pass in the city and not in the county. The cities are where the population is,” he said.

Francis said he welcomes the new version of the measure in Oxnard, where the mayor is proposing that the city enter into joint-powers agreements with the county, Camarillo and Ventura to govern the proposed greenbelts.

“If SOAR is approved in the cities and not at the county level, then cities will be placed at a tremendous disadvantage,” Lopez said. “The county would be in the development business.”

Lopez said he is not looking to place a competing measure on the ballot, which SOAR backers had feared could undermine the original version.

Francis praised Lopez’s approach as a bold policy statement.

“This one actually goes above and beyond what we would have asked for and there’s no reason to oppose it,” he said. “In my opinion the council is saying, ‘County, keep your hands off.’ ”

The message may be clear, but the legalities surrounding it are less so. Councilman Dean Maulhardt questions whether it is wise to confuse matters.

“We have an initiative on the ballot, and what is the purpose of replacing it with this one?” he asked.

Some Simi council members also questioned the relevance of the initiative, but approved it nevertheless.

Councilwoman Williamson said the local effort is unnecessary considering the body of city ordinances, such as the Hillside Performance Standards, which have already accomplished much of what SOAR is aiming to do.

“SOAR isn’t going to do anything. . . . What it is they want, we’ve already got,” she said.

The Simi council on Monday also discussed whether to drop the initiative entirely in favor of adopting a city ordinance that would mirror SOAR’s proposal to freeze growth outside the city’s sphere of influence.

According to analysis conducted by the city earlier this year, a local SOAR initiative could result in skyrocketing property and development costs, higher housing density and grossly inappropriate development within the city.

Because development would be restricted to within the city’s sphere of influence, the value of undeveloped land would increase tremendously, the report said.

That, in turn, would drive up the price of residences as well as result in zoning changes to allow more homes and businesses on each acre to offset increased prices.

The report added that by making future development dependent upon a countywide election, the initiative could also result in development that ignores carefully designated land uses.

Francis disagrees, however, saying that SOAR will not only preserve the county’s bucolic ambience, but will lead to better-planned and more conscientious projects.

“Cities are going to demand better-quality developments because of the limited space,” he said. “It will make developers more careful when they sit down to plan.”

A remaining question is whether officials are saturating the county’s voters with elections, which Williamson and others said would not only cost an inordinate amount of money but wouldn’t attract people to the polls.

“I’m still wondering how that would ever work,” Williamson said. “It’s hard enough just to get people out to vote for their schools, let alone whether to put a mall in.”

Times staff writer Hilary E. MacGregor contributed to this story.