Home > Resource Center > In the News Home > Greenbelt Alliance in the News

Greenbelt Alliance In the News

September 29, 2002

Town growth at crossroads

Windsor's Measure X would limit housing permits, council power

Windsor voters will soon decide on a growth-control measure that would drastically alter the way public officials have done business with developers since the town was incorporated a decade ago. Measure X on the Nov. 5 ballot would set firm limits on how many new housing permits the town issues every year. And in doing so, it would restrict the Town Council's ability to negotiate with developers.

In recent years, the council has granted housing permits in exchange for land for schools and parks, and it has used that bargaining power to wrestle other concessions from developers. Measure X, though, would eventually limit the number of new housing permits to an average of 75 a year, with exceptions for low- and moderate-priced homes. That's half as many as allowed under existing guidelines established by the Town Council.The initiative would severely curtail the town's ability to grant exceptions to developers who offer land and other amenities in return."We can't trust the politicians to hold the line on growth," said Bill Patterson, who is head of the group that crafted the initiative and collected the signatures to place it on the ballot.

Even when well intentioned, the Town Council is apt to succumb to developers' "slick sales pitches," Patterson said. And that, he added, explains why the council approved two subdivisions currently under construction in southwest Windsor, the second of which exceeded the council's own growth limit.

In 1996, the council gave Klein Family Vintners the right to build 535 homes. In return, Klein agreed to sell 40 acres to the Windsor School District for $2.8 million for the town's first high school, and to build its corporate headquarters downtown. Four years later, the council allowed Condiotti Enterprises to build 445 new homes in exchange for a $4 million, 10-acre soccer park.

Volunteering for measure
"We feel that it's not good planning to put your town up for sale," said Jim Winston, who led a growth-control initiative that Healdsburg voters approved in 2000 and who is now volunteering his services as a consultant for the Measure X campaign. But opponents of Measure X -- which include the entire Town Council, the Chamber of Commerce and two prominent environmental groups -- argue that the initiative is too restrictive and might have the unintended effect of leading to more sprawl.

At stake are the freebies, such as the soccer park, that developers offer in exchange for housing permits, Councilman Steve Allen said. Under Measure X, the town might have to devote more of its own budget to such amenities, or make do without them, he said. "Someone may have come in and offered a swimming pool, but knowing they would not get the permits, they might not offer that," he said.

Additionally, the initiative would stall downtown redevelopment, according to Mayor Sam Salmon. As envisioned, Windsor's old downtown will be an upscale center with an Old West look. Three-story buildings will offer retail space on the ground level and apartments and condominiums upstairs. So far, developer Orrin Thiessen has framed several of the structures, and he is on track to finish 85 housing units this year, and another 150 over the next two years.

Concerns for business
But Measure X would slow the pace of construction, Salmon said. And without a critical mass of downtown residents, some businesses won't move there, and those that do might not survive, he said. Measure X proponents say they support old downtown, and they deny that the initiative would hurt its redevelopment.

Thiessen, though, dismissed proponents' suggestion that he build affordable housing, which state law exempts from the measure's restrictions. "When you're talking about the moderate- and low-income housing, you're not talking about that kind of architecture," he said of the distinctive buildings planned for old downtown."This construction is very expensive," he said. "But it should go into the downtown. It's what the Town Council and the planners want."

For council members Allen and Lynn Morehouse, among others, the affordable housing exemption itself is a concern. Both said that, under Measure X, it could lead to a proliferation of inexpensive apartments and condos. "Is that the kind of town you want to live in?" asked Cindy Holman, president of the Windsor Coalition for a Healthy Community, a political action committee formed by the Windsor Chamber of Commerce to lead the fight against the initiative. "That's the question that should be put to the voters."

Measure X comes before Windsor residents on the heels of the town's 10-year anniversary. Throughout its brief history -- a period during which the population increased more than 70 percent to almost 24,000 -- growth has been the defining issue of local politics. When Windsor incorporated in 1992, its leaders faced a backlog of 1,200 homes that were approved by the county but not yet constructed. Since then, they've ushered in a variety of measures to help manage growth, including a new urban boundary adopted in 1998. In 1997, the Town Council adopted its own growth-control ordinance limiting the number of new housing units to 170 a year, for a growth rate of about 2.5 percent annually. Three years later, the council lowered the figure to 150.

But Measure X frontman Paterson, who ran unsuccessfully for Town Council in 1998 and 2000, said the ordinance contained so many exemptions that it was "toothless."

Own limits exceeded
Indeed, the council exceeded its self-imposed limit in 1999 and 2000, approving a total of 730 new houses. Last year, the council reversed the trend, approving just 129 new houses. Measure X, too, makes exceptions for developers with existing contracts. Its 75-permit limit would not take effect until the completion of the two subdivisions in southwest Windsor. Until then, the initiative would give those developers 150 housing permits a year and set the total number of additional permits at 50.

Measure X also has generated considerable opposition beyond the Windsor town limits. Greenbelt Alliance and Sonoma County Conservation Action have taken stands against Measure X. The two environmental groups agree that it could hurt downtown redevelopment, which they characterize as smart growth. They fear that if Windsor's expanding population is not channeled into the downtown area, demands for development will increase outside the city, leading to sprawl.

Business owners from throughout the county have also offered to help defeat the initiative, said Lee Dysart, fund-raiser for the chamber's political action committee. They fear that if the initiative passes, it could spur similar initiatives elsewhere, he said. "If Windsor goes in that direction, we're probably going to see it in every community in Sonoma County," he said. Winston, the consultant for the Measure X campaign, essentially confirmed Dysart's analysis, saying he is already considering a similar effort in Santa Rosa. "The pro-growth faction sees us marching down the 101 corridor," he said. "And they've drawn the line in Windsor."

You can reach Staff Writer Sam Kennedy at 521-5312 or skennedy@pressdemocrat.com.

###