Voters May Rule on Open-Space Levy

Ventura County voters, who have already approved some of the strictest growth control laws in the country, may be asked next year if they want to dig into their wallets to buy and protect land from development.

The Board of Supervisors will debate Tuesday whether to put a sales tax increase on the November 2004 ballot. Money raised by the increment would be used to create and fund a proposed countywide open-space conservation district.

Residents and their elected representatives appear receptive to the idea of permanently preserving Ventura County’s distinctive citrus orchards, open ridge lines and rolling farm fields, a recent survey of local governments shows.

But several government leaders are questioning whether next fall would be the right time to hit voters up for the dollars.

The improving economy could make voters more willing to approve a tax increase of an eighth to a quarter of a cent per dollar, some say. But with Sacramento finances still in upheaval and the possibility of other tax increases on the same ballot, the timing may be wrong, Supervisor Steve Bennett said.

But Bennett said he was willing to at least begin the process of preparing a measure, in part because a 41-member advisory committee appointed by supervisors to look into the matter was strongly in favor of doing so.

“What if the state puts a half-cent sales tax on the same ballot? You have to take all of that stuff into consideration,” Bennett said. “But we will have until sometime next summer to make a final decision.”

His board colleague, Judy Mikels, disagrees. Mikels said the cost of preparing a ballot initiative, about $200,000, was just too high at a time when the county was facing the prospect of severe cuts in state funding.

“As far as I’m concerned, this is not the year to put this on the ballot,” she said. “We need to back off and see where our budget is in January.”

Four of the county’s major cities -- Oxnard, Simi Valley, Moorpark and Camarillo -- have told supervisors they don’t support the latest blueprint for how the district would work. Their main beef appears to be the way the funds would be distributed. Under the proposal, revenues would be disbursed equally in three broad geographic areas -- north, east and west.

Land acquisitions in the east area, for instance, would be closest to Thousand Oaks, Simi Valley and Moorpark residents. The west area includes Camarillo, Oxnard and Port Hueneme, while the north encompasses Ojai, Ventura, Santa Paula and Fillmore.

Leaders in several cities objected to that formulation, arguing that revenue generated within a city should be used for projects near that city.

This would benefit a city like Oxnard, where large shopping centers and auto malls contribute to high sales tax receipts. Mayor Manuel Lopez said it was only fair that Oxnard get its proportionate share of land-acquisition dollars.

Oxnard also wants a greater presence on the five-member board that would run the open-space district. As it stands now, those positions are appointed by the Board of Supervisors, which would decide what cities would be represented.

“If we are going to supply the bulk of resources, we should have more say-so in how those funds are allocated,” Lopez said.

Still, the city would probably support the ballot measure if it were “tweaked a little,” the mayor said.

Advisory committee members are adamant, however, that the focus of the district be regional. In a report to supervisors, the committee said it envisioned a program that would fund land conservation projects that benefit all county residents, regardless of where they live.

Supervisors have pursued the district since 1998, when 68% of voters, in an advisory ballot measure, said they would support its creation.

Supporters see it as the long-term successor to the landmark SOAR growth-control laws enacted by Ventura County voters five years ago.

Those laws prohibit development on farmland or open space unless voters give approval. Supporters say the laws are the primary reason Ventura County has been able to retain its semi-rural nature despite bumping up against metropolitan Los Angeles.

But those regulations begin to expire in 15 years, raising the specter of rapid development unless steps are taken to buy up prime land.

After examining several possible funding mechanisms, the advisory committee is recommending that the county pursue a measure for a tax increase of an eighth of a cent on the November 2004 ballot.

However, state law says that any measure calling for a tax increase of less than a quarter cent must first be approved by the Legislature. So if the county is unsuccessful in getting a bill passed in the 2004 legislative session, it should go with a quarter-cent tax increase, the committee said, meaning the measure could go straight to voters.

The important thing is to move now, committee members said. State bond money that could be leveraged to buy property will likely be available for only three to four more years, they wrote in the report to supervisors.

Supervisor John Flynn, who first proposed the open-space district’s formation along with former Supervisor Frank Schillo, said he was eager to see it finally go to voters.

“I just want the voters to say yes or no,” Flynn said. “It’s taken way too long to get here.”