Moorpark to Finally Get Its Say on Growth Issue

Residents in this farm town-turned-suburb have long waited to weigh in on Ventura County’s growth-control debate, forced to watch from the sidelines as voters in other communities set clear agendas for how their cities should expand.

Come Tuesday, the wait will be over.

In what is being called a watershed election for the onetime farm community, Moorpark voters will go to the polls to decide whether to adopt strict growth-control measures and halt construction of the largest housing project in the city’s history.

Passage of the Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources initiative would prevent the city from growing beyond its borders without voters’ approval.

A second ballot measure would overturn the Moorpark City Council’s approval of the Hidden Creek Ranch housing project, which would add 3,221 homes to the city and boost its population by one-third over the next two decades.

Taken together, the twin initiatives represent the most extensive effort yet in Ventura County by slow-growth activists bent on giving voters the final authority in land-use decisions.

Moreover, many believe the election represents a crossroads for a city not even two decades old, a defining moment for residents confronting competing visions of their community’s future.

“It is the most important election in Moorpark’s history,” said Roseann Mikos, a 17-year resident and coauthor of the SOAR measure. “It will allow people to have some control over urban sprawl. And if we don’t do it now, we probably will have lost our last chance.”

More than 16,000 residents, nearly 60% of the city’s population, are registered to take part in the election, which comes two months after voters countywide approved a SOAR measure that prevents farmland and open space outside cities from being rezoned for development without voters’ approval.

During the same election, voters in Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo and Oxnard approved complementary SOAR measures such as the one on the ballot in Moorpark, blocking development outside their borders.

A similar measure in Santa Paula was defeated at the polls.

The Moorpark measure was intended for the same ballot, but legal wrangling and bureaucratic delays forced a special election instead.

Slow-growth activists and others say Moorpark is especially vulnerable to development pressures. Because its neighbors have all enacted tough growth-control restrictions, Moorpark could become the favorite target of development interests countywide unless local voters adopt a SOAR measure of their own.

While agreeing that runaway growth is undesirable, opponents say the SOAR effort is misguided.

They say the best way for Moorpark to control its future is to allow careful, planned growth, not to shut it off altogether. They contend the city needs to increase its tax base if it is to provide the public services residents demand.

Project Offers Open Space, Revenues

Chief among the opponents is Costa Mesa-based Messenger Investment Co., which is proposing to build Hidden Creek Ranch. In addition to the housing, the project would give Moorpark 1,700 acres of open space and hand the city and school district tens of millions of dollars in building fees. The money would be used to build and improve schools, roads and other public facilities.

“It’s certainly a major opportunity for the residents of Moorpark to take control of their future,” said Gary Austin, Messenger’s vice president of planning and entitlements.

“My theory is, if you are going to have growth, and I don’t think you can stop people from coming to Southern California, you want to have control over that growth,” he said. “What Moorpark has the opportunity to do here is implement a master plan over approximately 4,300 acres that is very predictable, that is phased, that has all kinds of controls and conditions, that really does give them control over their future.”

Whatever the outcome of Tuesday’s election, many expect the electoral battle in Moorpark to simply give way to a legal battle.

If, for instance, voters approve SOAR but also give city leaders the green light to push forward with Hidden Creek Ranch, the result would amount to halting growth while approving it at the same time. The inconsistencies almost certainly would have to be sorted out in court.

In fact, the Ventura County Agricultural Assn. last week warned Moorpark council members they would face a lawsuit if SOAR passes. The association, a nonprofit trade group of farms and farm-related businesses, contends the initiative violates state laws governing annexation and boundary issues.

“It could really muddy the water completely,” said Councilman John Wozniak, who opposes SOAR and supports Hidden Creek Ranch. “What I have said all along with this is that it’s unfortunate that we have put this on the ballot but it may be decided by a judge somewhere else, not by the people.”

While the city only incorporated in 1983, the community actually dates back more than a century to when it was a railroad watering station surrounded by apricot and walnut groves. What there was of the town centered on High Street, which, with its wood and brick storefronts, still resembles a western movie set.

From a population of about 8,000 upon incorporation, the city has grown to about 29,000 residents, most of whom have moved into sprawling housing tracts that replaced the farmland.

There have been plenty of battles over growth and development over the years. But last year SOAR’s Ventura-based leaders teamed with Moorpark activists who had been fighting the Hidden Creek Ranch project for nearly a decade. The battle was raised to a new level.

Acknowledging that SOAR had strong public support, elected leaders in the county and five cities--Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Santa Paula, Camarillo and Oxnard--agreed to place the measures on the ballot.

Competing Measure Placed on Fall Ballot

But Moorpark council members, who were in the final stages of approving Hidden Creek Ranch, refused to do so. Instead, they placed a competing growth-control measure on the fall ballot that specifically exempted Hidden Creek Ranch from land-use restrictions.

Activists gathered enough signatures to place the SOAR measure on the ballot, but a Superior Court judge eventually removed it on a legal technicality, leaving only the council’s alternative. SOAR leaders vowed to try again, again collecting enough signatures to place the measure on the November ballot. But city officials were slow to review the new petitions, and the deadline for the fall ballot passed.

The city’s slow-growth measure was approved by voters in November. In the meantime, slow-growth activists qualified another measure for the ballot, this one aimed at invalidating the approval of Hidden Creek Ranch in August.

Unlike voters in the other city-based SOAR campaigns, Moorpark residents Tuesday will be able to adopt strict new growth controls and then immediately decide whether to approve new development.

“The difference in Moorpark is they have a huge development pending,” said Ventura-based urban planner William Fulton, who has been monitoring the SOAR debate in Ventura County and across the state. “I think this is an unusually volatile situation where the conditions happened to be right for a pitched battle.”

Indeed, it has been an especially divisive campaign. Longtime friends have parted, petitioners gathering signatures have been harassed by paid agitators, and city leaders have been accused of caving in to one side or the other.

After steering clear of the political debate for months, Moorpark Mayor Patrick Hunter last month announced his support for SOAR and the referendum to halt the Hidden Creek Ranch project.

He said there is still plenty of room for residential growth within the city’s borders and that there is no reason to go outside that boundary to develop the Hidden Creek Ranch property. Even if SOAR passes and Hidden Creek Ranch is rejected, Hunter said, the city still stands to grow by nearly 50% because of housing projects within the city boundaries due to come on line in coming years.

Hunter said Hidden Creek Ranch, with its attendant traffic and air pollution, would destroy the quality of life in Moorpark. “I believe the Hidden Creek Ranch project represents the end of living [well] and the beginning of survival,” said Hunter, the only council member to vote against the project. “This election is that important, it really is.”

Councilman Wozniak agrees Tuesday’s ballot is important, but for a different reason. He said the project represents managed growth and that it will generate the kind of money the cash-strapped city needs to support its public services.

“If we are really looking for logical, managed, controlled growth, I can’t see any better way than this to do it,” he said. “Stopping that, you kind of ring the death knell for the city.”

While Wozniak and Hunter are ideologically miles apart on those issues, they do share a common concern about the effect of the growth-control debate. They worry the election has somehow permanently scarred their community, that the divisions have cut so deep that they will take years to repair.

“I think there has been some permanent damage done, not to the city, but to the trust of both government and the people who serve in government,” Hunter said. “It will take some time to repair and it’s a very slow process, but it can be restored. And I’ll work to make sure it’s restored.”