SAN MARCOS: Residents to settle Prop. O debate next week

Growth-control initiative would require vote on development projects

By ANDREA MOSS - Staff Writer | Saturday, October 25, 2008 6:08 PM PDT ∞

Prop O in San Marcos supporters, from left, Leeanor Filkins, Lita Bowles, Cynthia Skovgard and Kris Carmichael gather at Prop O headquarters Saturday. (Bill Wechter - Staff Photographer)

SAN MARCOS ---- Months of impassioned debates will end Nov. 4 when local voters weigh in on Proposition O.

Officially known as the San Marcos Growth Management and Neighborhood Protection Act, the initiative would require voter approval for most projects that don't conform to a growth plan mapped out for San Marcos in the 1970s ---- for example, a 200-home development in an area identified on the plan for a 150-home development.

Nonconforming projects that come in under the limits of the growth plan would not require a public vote.

Simple, yes?

Not quite.

In reality, Prop. O is a highly charged, complex initiative that pits slow-growth advocates against rapid development. And in a fast-growing city like San Marcos, the initiative has become such a hot issue that out-of-towners have gotten involved.

Prop. O supporters say it will give residents the power to decide which projects get built in the city. That kind of power is necessary, they say, to stop an out-of-control City Council that approves large developments over residents' objections.

"What this does is it gives people the right to vote on the future development of our city," said Cynthia Skovgard, one of Prop. O's primary backers. "It's giving people back the power."

The initiative's opponents ---- including the City Council, which approved a resolution opposing Prop. O in July ---- warn that it will strangle the city's economy. They also say the city will have to shell out tens of thousands of dollars for elections and defend Prop. O against expected legal challenges, if the initiative passes.

Mayor Jim Desmond said San Marcos residents already have another option.

"If people don't like what's going on in the city, if people don't like the way the city's going, vote out the people in office instead of having an election for virtually every zoning change," he said.

Prior efforts

Skovgard helped lead a signature drive earlier this year to get Prop. O on the ballot, after two failed attempts at a ballot referendum campaign that would have overturned the council's 2007 approval of the controversial Palomar Station project.

The mixed-use development will feature 333 condos built over dozens of ground-level shops and restaurants on 14 vacant acres south of Palomar College.

The council held numerous public workshops and hearings before approving the project.

Citing the sessions as evidence that the council listens to residents, Prop. O opponents say the initiative's backers just don't like Palomar Station's proximity to their businesses.

"This is just sour grapes," said Jim Hernandez, a former chairman of the San Marcos Planning Commission and now a member of the group behind a "No on O" campaign. "Our polls have shown that 68 percent of the citizens agree that we have been doing a good job."

Skovgard, however, said voters' decision to overturn the council's 2003 approval of a controversial Wal-Mart store near the city's border with Carlsbad showed that residents are tired of being ignored when it comes to development.

Financial drain?

Prop. O critics emphasize that the plan was created decades ago and doesn't include Cal State San Marcos, the huge San Elijo Hills residential development, and other projects that have helped define the city in the last 15 years.

If Prop. O passes, they say, it will scare away developers because they won't want to go through the time, expense and uncertainty of an election.

The resulting dearth of development will shut off the flow of developer fees into a city that uses the money for everything from roads and parks to safety services, opponents say.

A city-funded analysis concluded in June that Prop. O also could kill or delay several developments already planned for San Marcos. They include the so-called Creek District project, which would create a downtown area of shops, restaurants, offices and homes along San Marcos Creek.

And city estimates put the cost of Prop. O-related elections at $12,000 to $14,000 each, if they are combined with general elections. Special elections, or those held independently of regularly scheduled elections, would cost $250,000 each, according to city figures.

Combined with legal defense fees, Desmond said, "That's definitely going to be a drain on the city."

Skovgard said lawyers helped write the initiative. Though the Creek District project may have to be scaled back to meet the city's growth plan, Prop. O will not stop that project, she said.

Skovgard also said infrastructure would not be an issue if the council had not let development get out of control.

"David versus Goliath"

Financial disclosure statements filed early this month revealed that Prop. O opponents had spent $90,900 to fight the initiative as of Sept. 30. Most of the money came from developers and people in the real estate, utility and construction industries, the statements showed.

The financial support has enabled opponents to conduct expensive telephone polls, send out mass mailings and take other steps to spread their message on a large scale. Kristal Kritzer-Jabara, chairwoman of the political action committee fighting Prop. O, said recently that the effort is necessary to make sure voters understand the dangers of the proposition.

Those backing the initiative are working with far less money ---- slightly more than $2,000 in donations by the end of September.

The group has relied on volunteers who recently began tossing Frisbees with an eight-page newsletter outlining their pro-Prop. O arguments into residents' yards.

"This is definitely a citizens' David versus Goliath," Skovgard said. "There's people from every part of the city working on this campaign, and they're irate. There's a lot of them that maybe you don't see. But I'm proud of them 'cause they're working hard."

Working together

Prop. O opponents have pointed to a growth-control measure that passed in Escondido in 1998 as an example of the local initiative's potential to hurt San Marcos' economy.

Escondido Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler and City Councilman Dick Daniels entered the debate earlier this month when the two said their city's measure, Proposition S, has hampered efforts to improve Escondido and its economy.

Their contention angered Escondido resident Lisa Prazeau.

President of the citizens group that helped pass Prop. S, she said she believes inadequate economic development efforts on Escondido's part ---- and not its growth-control measure ---- are the reason for the city's financial woes.

Prazeau said she and residents of Poway, Solana Beach and other cities with growth-control measures are helping with the pro-Prop. O campaign. It's only logical that people who are tired of never-ending growth and development have started working together to fight it, she added.

"Rather than reinventing the wheel, we're going to reach out and see what we can do for each other," Prazeau said. "It's about bringing the power of the people together."

Contact staff writer Andrea Moss at (760) 739-6654 or amoss@nctimes.com.

Web sites

Proposition O supporters:

http://www.protectsanmarcos.com

Proposition O opponents:

http://noonpropo.com

More Stories

Tags: Top Inland Local NCT News San Marcos Elections2008

Bookmark and Share

Ads by Yahoo!

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

Rock On wrote on Oct 25, 2008 7:55 PM:Rock On Prop O proponents!!

Great, Great, Great Job.

Vote YES on PROP O

Thank you for your time & superior efforts!! Alot of sweat and time have been put into giving some of the power back to the people! You guys - Cynthia, Lita, Susan, Leeonar & Kris ROCK!!

Good Residents of San Marcos:
The supporters of this group are truly looking out for the best interests of San Marcos. These people have absolutely nothing to gain - they only wish to maintain the qualities of San Marcos in which you enjoy today. These volunteers are looking out for the quality of life for all residents.

As we all know, the housing market is in the deep, deep, deep trouble!! We all know who built the mass majority of those homes & tracts & condos - and what has all this done to the value of our own homes? We know what this has done to the value of our homes. We won't even talk about what this has done to the economy of the nation!

Traffic. These volunteers recognize that the roads - the major arterials are congested to the point where the increase in average daily trips is outweighing the infrastructure.

It goes on and on...there are a thousand + reasons why these volunteers have spent hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of HOURS to see this initiative to the polls.

Rock on San Marcos Volunteers!

Vote YES on PROP O

it is by the citizens for the citizens

Giggler wrote on Oct 25, 2008 8:03 PM:I'm giggling because I just saw the website address of the opponents.

How does one pronounce that? Is it pronounced: spec-u-lae-tors?

Just rolling on the floor laughing!

I like the supporters website address - it is evident their position: Protect San Marcos!

Vote Yes on Prop O

It is good for San Marcos - their are so many amenities - save them while you can!!!

Simon says wrote on Oct 26, 2008 1:19 AM:Once Prop has been approved by the voters of San Marcos, it will be the responsibility of San Marcos City Council and City employees to write an ordinance to amend the current San Marcos General Plan.
From the Sample Ballot & Information Pamphlet issued by the County of San Diego Registrar of Voters:
"PROP O
Shall an ordinance be adopted amending the San Marcos General Plan to require voter approval of certain general plan amendments modifying or changing land use categories or designations?"
As with any plan, the success of the plan is in the writing. If the city council does a good job writing the ordinance then there will not be any changes required for many years to come. But, it seems that they think they will not do so hot. It is really all up to them.
Voting YES on PROP O is where we will get our "controlled, quality growth" as called for by Hal J. Martin who is running for reelection to the city council.
I believe the City officials and employees have forgotten who they work for!
Vote YES on PROP O!

RICHARD wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:48 AM:DESMOND HAS THE RIGHT IDEA.TO BAD HIS TERM ISN'T UP SO WE COULD VOTE YES ON O AND NO ON DESMOND!

Don wrote on Oct 26, 2008 9:45 AM:The day of reckoning is arriving. We, the People, of San Marcos get to decide if we want to continue reckless growth through Exemptions or have sensible growth.

I'm voting Yes on Prop. O. My reasoning is simple: because the citizens approved the Growth Management plan, they should have to vote on Exemptions to the Growth Management Plan.

To not have that right means any end-run around the Growth Management Plan can be approved via Exemptions that a rubber-stamping City Council is much too eager to approve over the very vocal opposition by the citizens impacted by that Exemption. That is not how government in a Democracy should work.

Developers should build according to the Growth Management Plan. All Exemptions need to pass a very high hurdle otherwise the Growth Management Plan is ineffective because of the ability to end-run it via Exemptions.

Passing Prop. O installs that very high hurdle and makes it the law. As a result, San Marcos citizens get back control of their city.

Vote Yes on Prop. O if you feel citizens should have control over their city. That's what Democracy is all about.

Don

Why did you move here then wrote on Oct 26, 2008 10:01 AM:Simple question really. If the City was doing such a bad job you wouldn't have moved here in the first place right? The last 15 years of growth in this City has made it the best and most diverse City in North County. All the while it has been accomplished with a smaller staff and an interest in providing residents with the best of everything. The choices for all of us here are really amazing. Stop for one second and remember why it was you moved here anyway before you do something you will regret later. There are ample opportunities for the public to shape any of these projects at the various workshops and even just walk into City Hall and express your concerns. I've done it.

All of you folks who live in San Elijo should ask yourselves where you would be living now if this ill conceived proposition had been enacted 10 years ago. You can't have your cake and eat it to.

NO on O

To Why wrote on Oct 26, 2008 2:49 PM:Fifteen years ago the city was a lot less congested - maybe people moved to SM because there was some open space and elbow room.

San Marcos has some wonderful businesses and amenities. However, the streets are now more congested, the schools are overcrowded and the infrastructure is starting to take a beating.

The current council is known to be developer friendly - the planning commission is assigned to their seats by none other than the council.

Sure people can call, e-mail or go into city hall to express their opinions, but it's worth as much as spitting into the wind.

Voting elected officials out of office is easier said than done - especially when the councilmembers' campaign coffers are filled with dollar bills from developers, real estate investors and speculators.

Voting YES on PROP O will help San Marcos retain some of the great qualities that exist today. Without Prop O, San Marcos will over-populate and the residents will end up "paying" for the costs associated with such.

Vote Yes on Prop O

One more thing: The General Plan sets specific rules. Land owners have the right to build - of course. But, the developer doesn't get to come to the city and say this is what I want to build - now grant exemptions in order for this land to meet the proposed development. The developer cannot expect the rules to change to suit their project. The developer needs to plan to build within the guidelines of the GP. The developers have not been planning in this manner and the Council has granted exemption and amendment after rubber-stamped amendment!

Vote YES ON PROP O - it's a good thing!!

To Why did you move here wrote on Oct 26, 2008 3:41 PM:We moved here because we were promised by the General Plan that our city would build out at 90,000 population and we would have the retail and jobs that a city that size needs while still preserving our quality of life. This initiative protects the FUTURE, not the PAST! It is the future that we need to protect because the city and developer friends want unlimited growth beyond what we were promised when we moved here.

Who needs a big staff when everything a developer wants is given to them. All the city needs is a rubber stamp, pass it around and any project is in. Prop O will protect our future and allow us to vote on all those high-rise condo projects the city is planning that will push our capacity beyond the 90,000 that we have been promised. If we wanted to live in a city of 150,000 we would have moved to Los Angeles.

That's why......do you get it yet?

from a.... wrote on Oct 26, 2008 4:55 PM:25 year resident, Desmond's got a great idea, vote out the automatic approving Government.... AND lets vote yes on Prop "O", sounds like a good two-fer to me....

chatter wrote on Oct 26, 2008 6:27 PM:if you ever get the chance to speak to the mayor - Desmond he wants growth and the hosuing up on the mountain and a wider twin oaks ,more money for the city . i have spoken to him and asked why. I dont live in san marcos, so I dont have the option to vote on the topic,but have the chance to say my view here . widing twin oaks valley road wont make traffic less stop and go.just more cars and less clean air.

Again.... wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:04 PM:Would someone please name three projects that are "bad" and that would be subject to this ordinance. If you can name three, I will vote yes.

Stop Palomar Station wrote on Oct 26, 2008 11:09 PM:I'm voting YES on Prop. O because I strongly assert that it's passage stops Palomar Station dead in it's tracks.....in spite of what the lady "rent a City Attorney" glibly states. Just another developer shill hanging out in Council Chambers with the rest of the Boys In the Back Room.

Palomar Station was not legally ratified until AFTER this Prop O initiative was presented to the City with a date-specific beginning.
Therefore, the Palomar Station vote wasn't codified until after that date so let's nipp that abomination of bad government right in the budd. By....

Voting YES on Prop O on Nov. 4th.

To Again 1 2 3 More wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:20 AM:1. Palomar Station
2. Creek District
3. Fenton
and more....
4. University District

ONE MORE VOTE YES FOR PROP O!
Thank you!

To Again... wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:44 AM:Since there are no past projects to consider, only ones that come after,and all of us are told of projects if we live within 500 feet of them, there would not be much chance of slowing and investigating a bad project unless someone was near it. One BAD project comes to mind and that is that dangerous Palomar Station project where people are going to live in the industrial zone. That is the type of project that PROP O is designed to stop, if the voters of San Marcos wish to stop it, that is. Most projects fall within the General Plan and won't even see the vote. The good projects will get approval immediately and the marginal projects will just be made better. That is why I am voting YES on Prop. O. Don't forget Yes on Prop. N, which has as its supporters those Yes on O folks. For the people.

Just cool idea wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:17 AM:I just loved how I got my "Yes on O" information deliverd to me by a frisbee in my driveway at home. That is grassroot's organization working hard to get there message delivered.

Too cool wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:55 AM:I agree. Those Yes on O folks have to work hard to get attention with all of the BIG DOLLARS invested by developers, realtors, and the like, against Prop. O. It is a David and Goliath right here in San Marcos. Whoever thought that the people could rise up and fight against BIG MONEY. They sure are doing a great job. I got a door-hanger with a newspaper Yes on Prop O and Yes on Prop. N. Great job by people just like you and me.

Don wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:17 PM:I already posted above. I have one more thing to add to clarify an important perspective that the Mayor San Marcos didn't think about.

We, the people of San Marcos, elect our representatives or not. An equal right is to enact propositions by majority vote. We can exercise both options if we want as matter of Constitutional right.

Mr. Mayor, we the people, are not limited in our ways to choose to govern ourselves. You and the rest of the San Marcos City Council need a lesson in understanding all the rights we have under our Constitution. You seem to have forgotten that you work for us. Because you and and the City Council believe you are superior to us in thinking, I hope this election proves to you that we are just as smart if not smarter than you are. I already know I am at least as smart as you are and do not appreciate being spoken down to as if I can't tell what is a good project for an exemption or not.

Vote Yes on Prop O for many reasons and get back control of San Marcos from a Mayor and City Council that thinks they know better than we who they work for and need to be reminded of that fact.

Don

Are you guys insane wrote on Nov 1, 2008 6:08 PM:10 years ago San Marcos was nothing but dirt and factories. Over the past years there have been brand new shopping centers, schools, and REALLY nice communities compared to the old torn down ones that have been there for a 100 years.

The world is growing people you got to learn to deal with it. I grew up in OC which has over 3,000,000 people and traffic is always an issue. DONT DRIVE if your going to complain. Im glad I live in san marcos in a beautiful brand new home and im sorry to all the old residents that don't believe times change. Bottom line is that many communities are becoming over crowded and theres no where for people to live. SM has great potential. Just wait till CSUSM is all the way built in 10 years to an actual college

No on Prop O!

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos

Advertisement