I already started a discussion on term limits for county supervisors so I figured we would look at Fillmore's growth control measure.
I hesitate to tell the people of Fillmore what to do with their own town especially when I don't know all the facts about the proposed homes and their potential impact on the current homes. If you have a strong opinion on the Fillmore development issue please share it. Otherwise, I won't be another outsider telling the people of Fillmore what is best for them. I don't have a political agenda to impose on them without regard of the facts there.
But the initiative does bring up larger philosophical issues.
How should the growth of a town be governed?
I assume that most people want a mixture of free market economics and either direct or indirect democracy making the choices.
The real question is between the two decision making tools which way do you lean?
( Have you ever seen a strange person speak at a city council meeting? I bet it doesn't beat this guy! What is the oddest thing you have ever seen at a council meeting?)
It seems that as a city grows free market economics gives way to more democratic controls. The problems that a large city faces seems to convince people that their problems could be addressed by more government control. This includes congestion ricing, zoning, urban growth boundaries, setting up neighborhoods based off of government priorities or choices, and efforts to increase the tax base.
Recently, in Simi Valley our city council moved to limit the ability of new self storage businesses to open. The idea being that self storage businesses don't provide enough jobs.
As cities grow do they become more likely to support democratic control over growth and zoning choices?
Do market orientated towns grow into smart growth strongholds?
What does Fillmore need more homes for anyways? I thought they made their money off of selling fireworks. It is a pilgrimage site for the pyros amongst us. Today, like almost every July 3rd, I bet the traffic from Simi Valley to Fillmore is up by at least two fold.
If you leave a comment about purchasing fireworks there your IP address is safe with me. I do not share IP address with other Star blogs. Admit it. You really enjoy Filmore this time of year and it isn't for the Dept. of Fish and Game fish hatchery. Before people start complaining I know the money goes towards many charities. But I have a serious question. Do they fireworks go on sale this Saturday?
Just wondering. For a friend.
I know Ventura and Moorpark have exciting council gadflies but what about the other cities?
Small is beautiful.
The most important ingredient is the community. The people that live there make the community not the developers. The community has a duty to prevent the dangers over-developement creates.
Brian, you are running a fun blog in a fair manner. It is shocking that The Star will give any credibility to Steve Frank. The man has been the laughing stock of Simi Valley for two decades and now, finally, The Star gives in to his political games to benefit the Strickland political machine. It is a sad day for The Star.
Nobody,
Sounds like you are supporting democracy over private enterprise then?
I live in a city famous for its anti-growth initiatives. Ventura was the first to pass a citywide SOAR. Then we had a measure limiting growth in the hills. Now we have one which will limit building heights. Another group is busy gathering signatures to stop Wal-Mart.
I wrote a blog awhile back on citizen initiatives and unintended consequences. I'll leave the link here. (As an aside this was one of the few times where Mongo, Bubba and I all agreed on something.) I don't think people always understand what they are signing and often just rely on what signature gatherers are telling them.
Consequently I believe the initiative process sometimes produces flawed laws which benefit special interests. Maybe this one is different. I don't know all the particulars. I will be interested in reading the text of the initiative.
Marie,
Good points made here. While I agree with you that the citizen initiative process can sometimes produce unfavorable or unintended consequences, I also think we need to preserve this important option for the electorate. It gives citizens the ability to send clear messages and formulate changes to public policy when they feel they are being ignored by the people they elected to office.
Term limits is a classic example. Why on earth would elected officials be enthusiastic about limiting their own terms in office? Redistricting is another, for many of the same reasons.
I signed the redistricting initiative petition. It is one of the very few I have signed.
The same process which gives you this also gives you the anti-Wal-Mart and VCORD initiatives in Ventura, which I know you hate, Mongo.
I'm not a fan of this particular way of making laws and I believe it has greatly contributed to many of the troubles we have with the budget on the state level. Citizens don't get all the public hearings and analysis that our legislators get, especially when they are standing in front of Trader Joe's on their way to buy groceries and are hurriedly asked to sign something.
Did Frank run AGAINST Tom McClintock?
http://primary96.sos.ca.gov/e/cand/ad38.html
Agreed, Marie. But, people shouldn't feel compelled to sign those petitions unless they feel totally comfortable in knowing what they're signing.
This gets back to individual responsibility. It's just like signing a mortgage loan agreement. Read it thoroughly and have someone in the know check it out before you sign on the dotted line.
Flamo,
The signature gatherers frequently appeal to people's sense of civic duty by telling them they should sign to allow people to vote on it.
Many people hearing that appeal sign thinking that of course allowing people a choice is good.
I agree with your larger point though.
Would you sign something to put it on the ballot, even if you disagreed with it, so that people could vote on it?
Brian,
No, if I am philosophically opposed to an issue being placed on the ballot, I will not sign the petition. A good example for me is the "ban Wal-Mart" initiative that its supporters are currently gathering signatures for in Ventura. I was approached on my way into the supermarket the other day by a young guy who was really pitching it big time. I told him "no" because I am in favor of a Wal-Mart being built in Ventura.
This might be crazier than the guy with the puppets.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1818502
This might be crazier than the guy with the puppets.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1818502
Brian, thanks for the opportunity to discuss the Fillmore Initiative. I am a supporter of the Initiative and was also a signature gatherer. I can tell you that no one was coerced into signing the petition. Most locals are aware of this issue which is over two years old. If you saw the location in North Fillmore where a planned 700 homes was proposed you might agree with the supporters.
As you know, Fillmore has changed dramatically in the last few years and many residents feel the changes have been too much too fast.
Now the voters will have the opportunity to decide if the Plan is appropriate or not.