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

Greenbelt Alliance In the News

July 13, 2006

Land-use initiative on November ballot

Subheading

If enacted, the measure will purportedly stave future rural land development including hill area lands bounding the city of Milpitas. Opponents of the measure say it violates basic private property rights with concern to farms, ranches and privately owned lands.

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted twice over conditions related to the measure on June 20.

During a final 4-1 vote, with Supervisor Pete McHugh dissenting, they approved placement of the initiative on the Nov. 7 ballot.

The county's approval came after initiative supporters turned in 58,633 signatures to the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters. The campaign needed 36,040 signatures from county voters to qualify the initiative for the ballot.

"We had more than 22,000 additional signatures," said Peter Drekmeier, a Palo Alto city council member who is coordinating the campaign in support of the measure.

Drekmeier's group, People For Land And Nature or PLAN, is a coalition of environmental groups sponsoring what he terms a "smart growth" initiative.

PLAN comprises the Sierra Club, the Greenbelt Alliance and the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society.

Entitled the "Initiative for Conservation of Hillsides, Ranchlands and Agriculture," the measure calls for limitations to hillside growth and development throughout the county on unincorporated hill lands.

The main focus of the initiative is to limit parcel size and housing development in hillside areas as defined by the county's general plan.

The group hopes to set a minimum of one home per 160 acres. Currently, depending on use of the land, the county generally allows one home for 20 to 160 acres.

However, the land-use conservation initiative has drawn opposition from a coalition of realtor groups, ranching associations and property owners.

The coalition, known as the Alliance for Housing and the Environment, includes the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau, Silicon Valley Association of Realtors, Hillside Homeowners Association and the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors.

"We are going to fight the plan," said Edwin Resuello, president of Santa Clara County Association of Realtors.

He added, if passed, the initiative would make it "cumbersome" for property owners to build or add on to existing properties, for example, homes.

Under the plan, Resuello asserted that each individual home project built would first have to be brought before Santa Clara Board of Supervisors.

"You would actually have to have the county vote on it," he said.

Resuello suggested the initiative was a waste of time and money for voters.

In turn, PLAN proposes that the initiative will retain open space, preserve water resources and the natural environment. The group claims the initiative will spare the county from even greater urban sprawl.

"We support the measure because we see impacts to development and growth in the Bay Area," said Melissa Hippard, a Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter spokesperson.

The Sierra Club, she added, wants to see Santa Clara County effectively deal with that future growth and development without impinging on rural areas.

"We want to see growth absorbed in existing urbanized land," she said.

Unlike much of the rural lands, Hippard added urban areas already have utility services and infrastructure in place a situation that defrays cost to taxpayers.

In addition, she said the initiative would deter potentially ruinous development in the hillsides.

"We don't want to see mini-mansions dotting the hillsides," Hippard said.

But measure opponents also see the initiative as being detrimental to farmers and ranchers.

Jenny Derry, executive director of the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau, said the initiative would "devalue the land" used by farmers and ranchers if it were enacted.

"It will immediately devalue it," she said. "That's a big impact to businesses with the aspect of land, especially when land is the largest aspect for farmers and ranchers."

Calling it the largest land-use fight in Santa Clara County in 15 years, Derry added the initiative would threaten the county's more than 500 farmers most of whom operate smaller family-run farms.

"In Santa Clara County, most of the farms are small farms," Derry said. "We don't have (many large) corporate farms."

But the Sierra Club's Hippard suggested the land-use measure opponents would not devalue property, but instead will save money in the long run for landowners.

"Property affected (under this initiative) is definitely going to be taxed at a lower property tax," she said. "If you're a rancher, you don't want to pay a higher property tax."

Hippard added those who use rural lands such as ranchers should be supportive of the measure.

"As long as you're interested in the rural lifestyle, this (initiative) will support and protect that," she said.

Although against the initiative, Mike Miller, president of the Santa Clara County Cattleman's Association, said his group has yet to join the formal opposition campaign.

Miller added it was likely that the 130-member organization would do so in the coming month.

"We've kind of decided that on our own we won't mount much of a display," he said.

He added his organization will likely decide by mid-August whether they would be joining the group.

Miller, who leases ranch land in the Mount Hamilton Range, said his organization was by and large skeptical of the initiative and its purpose.

"Our main issue is the concern of private property rights; the government shouldn't be doing any more than what they're doing now with (our) private property," Miller said.

Both sides of the land-use issue expect an expensive fight.

According to Drekmeier, PLAN continues to raise campaign monies to support the measure.

"We've raised $200,000, and we have $200,000 in pledges," he said.

He added the group hopes to raise close to $1 million by November.

Drekmeier said he's hopeful that by November, the measure will pass.

"We're feeling very optimistic," he said. "We have tremendous support."

Derry said she could not say how much the Alliance for Housing and the Environment had raised, but knew that her group would not be raising the projected $1 million declared by initiative supporters.

"We will be nowhere near that number," Derry said. "It's definitely an uphill battle for us; we're really playing catch up now."

Meanwhile, Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters still has election ballot deadlines for this land-use initiative.

Ballot arguments for and against the initiative are due Aug. 16. Rebuttals to those arguments are due Aug. 23.

The estimated cost to place the initiative on the countywide ballot is $550,000, Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters reports indicate.

###