Development District Debated at Public Forum

Concerns about eminent domain were the central issue at a debate Monday night on the proposed establishment of a redevelopment district in midtown Ventura.

The forum at Buena High School, which drew about 75 people, comes less than two months before voters will decide the fate of Measure A, which would allow for such a district.

Alan St. James, who owns a midtown clothing store, Tiki Traders, and Ventura attorney Kathryn Heiberg represented the opponents to the measure at the two-hour public meeting. They argued that the plan would allow the city to use its power of eminent domain to acquire properties declared blighted.

“The document may not use the phrase ‘eminent domain,’ but they can do just that without those words,” said Heiberg, a midtown homeowner. “The permission is sprinkled throughout the document.”

But supporters of the plan, who were represented by former Ventura City Councilman Gary Tuttle and James McConica of McConica Motors in the midtown area, dismissed that argument as a “scare tactic.”

“The truth is, the redevelopment is purely voluntary,” said Tuttle, who owns a home and Inside Track, an athletic shoe store in the affected district. “Eminent domain has been stricken from the plan. . . . The city is not going to come and take your business and throw you out of your house.”

Tuttle and McConica said the proposal would lift midtown from its current suburban decay and allow local property taxes to stay in Ventura.

“A ‘yes’ vote on Measure A is a no-brainer,” Tuttle said. “This is nothing more than a $70-million tax shift from Sacramento to Ventura.”

Called the Midtown Corridor Redevelopment Project, the plan would take any increase in property taxes collected in the project area through 2043 to pay for newly paved streets, additional public parking lots and low-cost loans to rehabilitate aging structures.

The district boundaries would be East Main Street and East Thompson Boulevard from Ash Street east to Mills Road, including the Pacific View Mall and portions of Loma Vista and Telegraph roads.

If Measure A passes, midtown would be declared a blighted area. Then midtown property owners would be offered low-interest loans to renovate buildings, and financial assistance would be available to first-time home buyers trying to purchase in the neighborhood.

Audience members questioned whether the plan would really benefit property owners. They repeatedly asked whether property owners would be coerced into participation.

At one point, McConica read from the inch-thick redevelopment plan document.

“Acquisition of property by eminent domain is not authorized,” he read.

“Read the next paragraph!” someone shouted from the audience.

After being asked again, McConica offered, “I admit the following paragraphs are ambiguous, but the Ventura city attorney has issued a statement that there isn’t power for eminent domain in the plan. It’s very, very clear.”

The paragraph in question said the city can’t acquire property unless “such a building requires structural alteration, improvement, modernization or rehabilitation,” among other conditions.

Earlier, Heiberg held up a map of the redevelopment district, which is shaped like a pair of tweezers. Black dots covered most of the map.

“The black dots represent the blighted property,” she said. “That includes Mr. Tuttle’s property and my beautiful, three-story gray Victorian house.”

Another audience member asked whether the city could in the future add a clause that would allow for eminent domain.

“The plan can be amended,” McConica said. “But the only way it can be amended is to go through this whole process again. It’s not going to happen.”

Heiberg, however, said that the city could legally amend the plan after conducting two public hearings, and that another public vote would not be required.

Last November, the Ventura City Council approved the $72-million face-lift for the midtown business corridor. But earlier this year, opponents of the plan collected enough signatures to put the redevelopment project to a public vote, which will occur during a special election June 8.

If approved, the redevelopment district will be allowed to divert new property taxes into a special fund and invest it in the community. Cities often borrow against that future revenue to finance development and, more important, to spur private investment in the affected area.

The proposal has also spurred a court challenge.

After the city approved the redevelopment plan, the city of Oxnard filed suit against Ventura, saying it illegally included the Pacific View Mall--formerly the San Buenaventura Mall--in the proposed redevelopment district. Oxnard maintained that any properties in the district must indeed be blighted.

But then in late January, Oxnard and Ventura officials announced a settlement agreement that will end the long-standing dispute over a number of redevelopment issues, including the midtown redevelopment plan.

When forum organizers--the League of Women Voters of Ventura County--tried to end the discussion at 9 p.m., some in the audience became angry.

“Why are you editing the questions?” asked Virginia Gould of Ventura. She later asked whether the city had misused the definition of “blight” when so labeling most buildings midtown.

To be included in a redevelopment area, a property must fit a complicated legal definition of blight that requires cities to find elements of both physical and economic blight.

Tuttle and McConica said the city had used proper judgment when considering midtown properties.

Heiberg differed.

“Out-of-town consultants were paid to find blight, and they found it everywhere,” she said.