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

Greenbelt Alliance In the News

October 23, 2005

Developer Pardee is giving Livermore voters all it has

Transportation & Growth

But Pardee Homes hopes to win over city voters Nov. 8 with a 2,450-unit Livermore Trails project that includes some big carrots -- including a 130-acre sports park, land for a high school and elementary school, 750 acres of open-space preserve, trails and $10.4 million in endowments for public agencies and community organizations.

"Frankly, if this project can't win voter support, I don't know what can," said Joseph Perkins of the Homebuilders Association of Northern California. "Pardee has essentially gone all out in terms of what it's offering the community, and in terms of its ($2 million-plus) campaign. I've never seen a political campaign over a housing development waged on this level before."

Although Pardee's measure is just part of a new wave of developer-led initiatives in California, including three on next month's ballot in Contra Costa County, it seems to be getting the most attention by builders and environmentalists, Perkins said.

"Those who are inalterably opposed to building in North Livermore are determined to stop this. This is their line in the sand and they believe if they can defeat this measure, that will be the end of it for all time. And there may be some truth to that. It's why the cost of housing here is higher than anywhere else in the country. Look at what Pardee's had to lay out before they even turn over a shovel of dirt," he said.

In financial disclosure reports submitted in August, Citizens for Livermore Trails reported raising $500,200 in cash donations and $61,923 in non-monetary contributions from April 1 through June 30 -- all but $200 coming from Pardee. At that point, more than $1.37 million had been raised in all of 2005.

Pardee supporters say the project, which would include affordable units, would provide 450 acres for much-needed housing for families now being pushed into the more agriculturally fertile Central Valley, worsening commuter gridlock.

But critics, bolstered by the Sierra Club and Greenbelt Alliance, warn the development would snarl local traffic, harm critical habitat, carry hidden costs for taxpayers and open the floodgates to development throughout the 14,000-acre North Livermore area -- which has become so contentious that one observer recently compared it to Israel's West Bank.

Foes say developer initiatives like Pardee's make a mockery of the constitutional right of citizens to effect change through the ballot-initiative process.

"It's a new phenomenon, and I think it's very troubling," said David Reid of the Greenbelt Alliance. "It puts corporations in a position where they can buy an election, pay people to gather signatures and dump a few million dollars into a campaign. It's difficult for a grassroots campaign to stand up to that."

Voter approval is required for any urban development north of Livermore city limits. That is thanks to Alameda County's successful Sierra Club-backed Measure D open space initiative approved by county voters in 2000, and to Livermore's subsequent growth boundary addressing city annexations. It was adopted by the slow-growth City Council majority after the initiative qualified for the ballot with more than twice the required 3,700 signatures.

Pardee's measure "is aiming to defeat everything we did with those two measures," said Livermore resident Bob Baltzer. "It essentially guts our plan."

"For our residents, this project represents short-term inducement money with a long-term loss," said Mayor Marshall Kamena, who is part of a council majority fighting Pardee and who is making it a basis of his re-election campaign.

Pardee's proposed urban-growth boundary change differs from the ones in Contra Costa County in that council majorities in the affected cities there -- Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg -- are more supportive of developer proposals.

In Livermore, there are disputes over what voter approval would actually obligate the city, and Pardee, to do.

The developer would still have to go through a city approval process with public hearings and environmental reviews, which Pardee representative Carlene Matchniff says would subject it to traffic mitigation and other conditions beyond those listed in the initiative.

But opponents argue that developer promises not specified in the initiative, such as full traffic mitigation and solar-powered housing, are not guaranteed. They say that much would depend on the City Council.

They say Pardee should have gone through the city process first so that voters could have a greater up-front understanding of the project. But Matchniff said Pardee was virtually forced by the council majority to go the initiative route.

"They said we were on our own. They were unwilling to talk with us. I was point-blank told ... they would do everything in their power to stop this project."

Bonita Brewer covers the city of Livermore. Reach her at bbrewer@cctimes.com or 925-847-2120.

###