Battles Over Schools, Parks and Housing Belie a City’s History

On Sept. 29, 1964, 4,600 Conejo Valley voters went to the polls to decide whether to incorporate a new city. After midnight, they received word that the for votes had won by 959 ballots.

There were 38 people seeking five seats on the first council to govern the new city, including a bartender, a housewife, a gas station owner, two attorneys and four in real estate. The city’s first mayor was a pharmacist who garnered 2,600 votes. The only true landslide was in the choice of the city’s name, with almost 4,000 voters choosing Thousand Oaks over Conejo.

So began the life of a city that almost 120,000 people now call home, a city with proud history but, I fear, a troubling future.

In 1973, the Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce produced a slick brochure on life in a “vibrant new city on the move.” The booklet extolled the virtues of a community with “quality and diversified residential areas, excellent schools [and] extensive recreational facilities.” Among the reasons for prospective residents to “Come Grow With Us”: 79 schools, 2,844 acres of parkland, 44 churches and “housing concepts to meet the needs of those who prefer apartment, condominium, townhouse retirement and mobile home living.”

For the 20th anniversary of Thousand Oaks’ incorporation, the City Council prepared a booklet titled “Building a Balanced Community.” Mayor Lee Laxdal proudly proclaimed that the Thousand Oaks of 1984 benefited from “20 years of quality” and that “varied community and cultural activities, recreational and educational opportunities abound.”

Now 36 years have passed and I wonder if the vision of this city’s founders has been lost on those of us who inherited their legacy. Battles over schools, parks and housing seem to be at odds with the reasons this city was established. What could be more important to the life of a city than providing for the housing, recreational, spiritual and educational needs of all its residents?

St. Maximillian Kolbe Catholic Church is a beautiful house of worship. It has more parishioners than expected and is coping with growing pains. Area residents have fought expanded parking and complained that landscaping intended to screen the view of the church from their homes remains unfinished. Neighbors have urged parishioners not to park on public streets. Families who accede to that request must park in shopping center lots and cross streets to attend Mass, when they could safely walk into the church from the adjacent street.

*

Much has been made of the Thousand Oaks general plan adopted in 1970. That plan called for the development of a mixture of housing, including apartments and houses. Lately, we have seen City Council members removing apartments from the plan for the Dos Vientos area.

With homes come families and the need for more educational and recreational facilities. There is disagreement over the location of a proposed middle school. Residents near Lang Ranch Elementary School have obtained street parking restrictions. Thousand Oaks Little League was rebuffed by area residents when it tried to obtain ball field space at Oakbrook Park.

Why would anyone who moves to a city designed for families then take a not-in-my-backyard attitude toward schools and parks?

I wonder if the 2004 City Council will write in the city’s 40th anniversary book that Thousand Oaks continues to be the balanced community its founders intended. Or will they proclaim that the errors of those founders have been corrected and that residents can spend their entire lives in single-family homes free from such distractions as schools, churches and recreation?