SOAR ( Save Our Open Space and Agricultural Resources ) is ten years old. SOAR moves local zoning changes from the power of elected officials and directly into the hands of citizens.
I like the ideas behind SOAR. Citizens cannot easily be bribed, influenced, cajoled, threatened, or lobbied like elected officials who need cash to run again.
But of course, individual voters might not respect property rights of individuals and developers. Also, it might cost more to inform the voters of the benefits of a project, then to convince elected officials. And if voters, vote down a zoning change, doesn't that open the government to lawsuits?
Anyways here is a editorial printed in the Star about an upcoming party in the park. But of course they will only use 10 % of the park because they are setting aside the rest as open space. ( thanks for that joke, Tim!)
PRINT THIS STORY | E-MAIL THIS STORY
10 years later, S.O.A.R. has changed county for the better
By Wolf Breiman
September 25, 2005
Supporters, volunteers and friends of Save Open-space and Agricultural Resources will gather Oct. 9 for a 10th-anniversary celebration of its passage at Tierra Rejada Ranch in Moorpark.
In 1995, the electorate of the city of Ventura adopted the first of the S.O.A.R. initiatives in Ventura County. Three years later, in the largest grass-roots effort in Ventura County history, the county unincorporated area and four other cities also adopted S.O.A.R. reforms. Others followed.
Advertisement
In so doing, the authority of city councils and the Board of Supervisors to rezone land zoned for agriculture or open space to urban uses was rescinded, and requests to rezone were required to be submitted to the voters for approval.
Have the effects of the S.O.A.R. reforms, to date, justified their adoption? Have they proved their promised benefits and value? Without doubt. Yes!
Evidence is all around us -- seen and sensed in various ways and to varying degrees by all who observe the changing conditions of our communities, of our environment. But for a broad understanding of SOAR's benefits, we need to be aware not only of the change already visible, but of the far greater extent of undesirable effects that the S.O.A.R. reforms prevented, and of the enormous potential for future improvements they have created, and continue to create -- many of which are being realized.
The sight of various developments in progress throughout the county appears to some as evidence that S.O.A.R.'s effect is nil. They're mistaken. Some developments now in progress were approved prior to adoption of the S.O.A.R. initiatives; the rest are infill.
By severely impeding sprawl development (S.O.A.R.'s primary objective) development, to an increasing extent, is redirected into the cities.
In addition, the S.O.A.R. reforms are providing great impetus to redevelopment.
The adoption of S.O.A.R. countywide was an extraordinary achievement. To this day, Ventura County is the only county in the country to have adopted S.O.A.R.'s ballot-based method for containment of urban sprawl and preservation of farmland and open space.
Now, still relying on its volunteer base, but relatively established to protect its achievements and continue advancing its purpose on a permanent basis, S.O.A.R. will celebrate its 10th anniversary.
It's as good an occasion for community celebration and rededication as I can imagine.
-- Wolf Breiman lives in Ventura.
Anniversary celebration
S.O.A.R. will celebrate its anniversary Oct. 9 at Tierra Rejada Ranch in Moorpark. Among the activities that day are a birdwatching walk, a bike ride, a run and a noon luncheon. Ticket prices: before Monday, adults, $25; after Monday, $40. Children: 7-13 $10; 6 and under, free. Price includes lunch and most activities. For more information, go online to http://www.soarusa.org or call 653-0061.
Brian,
Nice picture in the Star today. I don't get one thing though, I have been accused of running the Star, but I can't seem to get my picture in the Star. What gives?!
I echo Arleigh's sentiments. I really enjoyed the article and reading about former students who have become teachers. Seeing both you and Dean (a friend of a friend) was refreshing. Keep up the good work!
As for Arleigh's question, perhaps Brian is a little more "photogenic" than you. Haha. Just having fun.
Brian:
Enjoyed the article in the paper this morning. I have an off-base question, though. Is there a dress code for teachers? I remember most of my teachers used to wear ties or business attire and I noticed in your picture that you're in a T-shirt with the students?
Do teachers still wear ties and business attire?
Scott
Thanks for the clarification. I think it's great to have school spirit days. Although, I've always been more comfortable in maroon and gold.
So, you want me to comment on SOAR? I want to say I do not oppose SOAR from raising funds and purchasing open space. I do not oppose any environmental group from participating in the market.
For instance, I have given money in the past to help non-profit groups to purchase areas of the everglades and other open spaces throughout the country at a fair-market value. If SOAR has this program in their non-profit program, I would surely give to help them purchase land and work in the open market.
What I do not totally agree with is using government as an instrument to stop growth and discriminate against landowners who are trying to produce projects that keep housing prices down and make a profit. I believe that if a developer has worked hard on a project to bring affordable units to town, that should be an over-riding consideration with regards to our current housing crisis.
I also do want to point out that a great deal of open space is preserved in perpetuity because city development agreements designate that land as permanent open space. It's about balance and I disagree with every project being condemned from the start.
I also think it's interesting that people who oppose growth usually own a home. Now, if you oppose developments because of open space that's one thing, but these people that oppose growth also financially benefit from opposing growth because their housing prices have gone up increasing their own net worth. We never question their conflict of interest, do we?
Scott
Brian:
Give me an example of having voters decide the zoning? Is this during the general plan phase or as they are getting ready to develop let's say a shopping market?
Question: Could we correlate SOAR with rising home prices? That is, SOAR was started ten years ago to restrict housing growth and we started seeing huge increases in property knocking out many first time buyers and middle income people.
Scott
Brian:
Doesn't locking in zoning make it extremely difficult to develop land? Let's say the previous owner of the burned down area of Pic N Save decides he wants to sell because he has no money to redevelop the area. Under the SOAR system he now has to find a buyer that wants to develop that area for what it's zoned for, correct? Now, certain buyers won't purchase because they can't do much with the property unless they purchase the land and go through an expensive ballot process?
Now government zoning has essentially limited the owner's ability to get a qualified buyer because development rights are very restricted.
Is this not a regulatory taking? Essentially, government zoning restrictions destroyed the fair market value of the property and undermined the seller's ability to buy and sell property.
Brian:
Do you like freedom?
Scott
scott,
don't make me whack you with my copy of wealth of nations...
isn't all zoning regulatory taking?
and doesn't the current approval process cost money ( campaign contributions, eir's, lobbying, research etc). if one is 1.5 percent of the total project and the other is 2.0, idealogy alone won't let you off the hook.
but, honestly, i don't have the figures.
brian dennert
Brian:
I knew I'd get you fired up with that last question...
No zoning isn't alone a regulatory taking because there is actually interplay between planning and the owner. If an owner wants to change zones, he can request that through the government process.
I believe the Supreme Court has upheld for over 100 years that local governments can zone under public nuisance law and government police power. Some of the first zoning came out of New York to ensure industrial wasn't being sited right next to people's homes. It was more related to public safety and public health. Now, people want to down zone properties because they don't want anything in there backyard so to speak the only problem is they are trying to regulate someone else's backyard.
I tend to agree with the Supreme Court that a city can zone, so long as the rights of the owner are taken into consideration.
Brian:
Yes, it costs a great deal of money and time to get a project passed. But, don't worry, becuase of the high cost of the development process, those costs are passed on to the consumer who pays an even higher premium for homes.
It begs the question... Are developers building million dollar homes because regulatory costs and barriers are so high and it's cheaper to purchase construction material in bulk to keep costs down? I think the regulations and planning process actually encourages larger lot development for the property owner to get a return...
Scott
The only thing "Soar"ing in Ventura County is Home Prices, as a direct result of Supply and demand being so out of whack.
In case after case, where you restrict development to limited areas, or none at all, the supply that is built is built at higher and higher prices. Combine this with already limited availability because we are at the coast, and you have a recipe for home price acceleration.
Property rights are guaranteed by the constitution. Right there in plain english. I am confident that the same people who support "SOAR" were against the appointment of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, over his position on "privacy rights". But why are some rights critical, and others' (SOAR FOLKS CALL THEM THE "haves") rights are meaningless?
Makes you wonder if the constitution is being taught in schools today, and by whom.
Tim Keaney
NILB Blog
Tim,
My understanding is that SOAR changes which part of the government chooses zoning changes.
From elected officials to voters.
Either group could use their power to limit property rights, no?
So why do you trust elected officials more I guess is the real question.
I look forward to your reply.
Brian Dennert
Elected officials and "us" are one in the same. We elect who we elect, and I expect them to uphold the constitution (that would be the oath "we" require them to take) and to have a better handle on property rights, population needs and growth patterns than the average citizen does.
I don't submit to this "us" (citizens) vs. "them" officials argument. If you don't like them, you don't take rights away - you vote them out.
Tim
Brian,
I hate to burst your bubble, but the US is an Elected, Republic Democracy. It is not a citizen democracy. We elect reps to represent us, at all levels.
Can you give me some specific examples of reps that were appointed, without opposition of any kind, or that were put into office against the direct will of the people?
Before you start listing the Simi City Council...
Paul Miller ran unopposed for Mayor. Where were the opponents, the issues and the money to defeat him?
Michelle Foster was appointed during a public selection process? Where were the speakers opposed to this process calling for a special election?
Assembly Member Strickland defeated two opponents during her primary, and two opponents during her general.
Richman - not appointed - always runs against a dem and defeats them. Has also advocated for changes to gerrymandering...
McClintock - wins every time he runs, except that one time he lost.
How is it the officials fault when no one runs against them? The ability to put your name on the ballot is cheap and easy - look at the school board races. Yet very few do it?
We don't have a direct democracy, we have an elected one.
As for your comment about edcucation officials.. I have plenty of respect for education officials who do their job, innovate and make a difference. As with other elected officials (education or not) I call them out when they err, when they are incompetent or worse.
Tim Keaney
Actually:
If Tim and I ran for Dog Catcher, I'd go negative early and often... J/K :)
Brian:
If you think elections are about educating the public you're being naive. Take a look at both sides in the special election and you'll see there is very little truth in advertising. Some of it is down right irresponsible.
My favorite line right now is...
"Face it, we all know Sacramento is screwed up and I"m willing to vote for anything to change it."
So, in no uncertain terms... Vote Yes because Sacramento is screwed up. By the way, pay no attention to what your voting for.... (Is that the education you're talking about?)
The union side is saying that if you vote this way, you are anti-firemen or anti-teacher. (Very Effective ads by the way.)
If its a an educational process than this is what the voter is going to think when they go into the voting booth...
I vote yes because I hate Sacramento politics enough to blindly vote yes for the Arnold Agenda or I hate Arnold's agenda enough and feel he is attacking revered community leaders like teachers of firefighters, so I vote no.
This just seems like a false choice to me. What if I hate Sacramento politics and I appreciate the efforts of teachers, firefighters, and other public employees? How does this person vote? They probably will just stay home...
So much for an educated debate on policies. This seems more like a bunch of third graders picking a kick ball team...
BTW, I predict a resounding defeat for Arnold in the special election. He has been unable to put a human face on these policies like the public employees have... People want a human face and firefighters and teachers unions are very good at this... They are winning the ad war.
Of course, be ready for a two week blitz during absentee balloting... Arnold has a lot of ground to make up.
Scott
Brian...
You dropped the iraq bomb (pun intended). The difference between Simi's mayoral election, and Iraq's dictatorial election is this:
In Iraq, it happened by force. In Simi, it was the choice of the electorate not to run against Paul Miller.
To equate the two, is ridiculous.
On to your main point. What is wrong with direct democracy in relation to SOAR? 1. It violates the rights of the property owner. 2. It gives greater powe to the majority (people riled up about "sprawl" and hurts the minority (the property owner). It's the only case I know of where the rights of the minority are not protected, and it's ok with everybody.
If it were Blough vs. Keaney for Dog-Catcher, I'd want Arleigh's endorsement and campaign skills so I could CRUSH Blough at the polls.
Tim
Brian,
The only way for you to have a choice, is for people to step up and run. You might think that's a failure of democracy, I call it a failure of people to get involved to make their community a better place.
It's not the system Brian, it's the people. We ARE the system.
Tim Keaney
Brian:
Tim is the one that would allow owners to keep Tigers and bears as pets. I am troubled by his support of apartment dwellers' keeping flying lemurs and anacondas around the house. It shows a very high level of tolerance for the intolerable. His campaign song should be "who let the dogs out."
Brian's positions are well-researched. Of course, We don't want someone to study the problem, we want someone to solve the problem. We want action.
Scott is the only action-oriented zero tolerance choice for dog catcher.
I am Scott and I approved this message.
It does beg the question: Who indeed DID let the dogs out?
I say, if Unit lessees ( I don't like the term "apartment dwellers" Blough, it shows you are out of touch). If Unit lessess can't have Lemurs in Blough's Simi Valley, is it a community worth living in?
I think not...
Tim:
I suppose you don't want to curtail the leumr issue because it'll save money. Well, We're not buying this "big bank account" scheme at the expense of the public.
We need action not empty illusions.
We need Scott's zero-tolerance approach for dog catcher.
Scott
(Is this educational enough for you Brian? Do you notice the circular logic and repetitive message? This is pretty absurd, but it proves the point that the public is not best by this sort of "campaign-speak".)
Scott,
The fact that I work with Lemurs, and that I have Lemurs in my family, and that in fact, I ran the Lemurs union for many years and negotiated salary and benefits for hundreds of Lemurs I think qualifies me more than you "Lemur Opportunists". To me, you and your ilk are nothing more than Politemurs...
Tim
Brian:
Mountain Lions would benefit from the fact that I take action quickly and take a no nonsense approach to enforcing the law.
While Tim personalizes his experience regarding his lack of lemur enforcement, I want to say this election is really about "you" the voter and not Tim inability to take a position on a simple issue like Lemur enforcement.
The public has a right to know all the answers regarding Tim's positions and contributors, which will enable them to make sound judgements.
What I want to do for the public is bring real enforcement and zero-tolerance as a Dog Catcher. Tim and Brian cannot make you those promises. I believe I have a duty to support the public's need for a no-nonsense approach and law and order.
Scott
(Brian, if you can tell me what was just said, let me know because this is just talking points. Basically, this is how message politics works. You say it and say it again. Do you think this serves the public best?)
I'll take the bait..
Brian, please explain this "lockbox"?
Tim
Tim,
I don't know if your teasing me but here goes.
Al Gore said all Social Security surplus ( it runs billions of dollars in the black every year and has for many years ) should be set aside and not spent on other programs or on tax cuts.
Being that we are running a defecit right now, money from the social security surplus is being spent on tax cuts for the wealthy, bridges in Alaska, and other issues. If the money was set aside, it would ensure social security remains solvent longer.
It is kind of like bond money. It is set aside for one issue.
Not that I want to debate social security or school board bonds. But that is a basic defintion.
Al Gore made the term popular. He was even teased by SNL because he advocated for it every day on the campaign trail.
It is not a device to use for dog catchers.