 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Home Resource Center In the News Home Greenbelt Alliance in the News |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
Greenbelt Alliance In the News
October 29, 2005 Pro-growth groups outspend their opponents Politics By Kiley RussellWith just 11 days until the November special election in which voters will decide the pace of growth in three East Contra Costa cities, the champions of expansion are outspending their adversaries by more than 16 to one. On Nov. 8, voters in Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg will determine the fate of separate developer-sponsored ballot measures that would allow each city to build more homes in what is now open space or farmland. As of Oct. 22 -- the end of the latest campaign finance reporting period -- the three developers combined had spent nearly $1.4 million to sell their plans to voters while their opponents spent a little more than $72,000, according to documents filed with city and county election officials. "We're used to being outspent 10 to one. When you have a pig, you have to put a lot of lipstick on it so people will kiss it," said David Reid of the Greenbelt Alliance. In Pittsburg, Albert Seeno III and his companies have spent $508,524 to pass Measure P. The initiative would expand the urban limit line around Pittsburg by about 1,400 acres, 551 of which would accommodate up to 1,600 new houses. "All campaigns and all communication efforts take a great deal of time and effort, and we're going to continue to tell our story, which we think is to the benefit of the city of Pittsburg, right up until the election," said Sam Singer, spokesman for Measure P. "And hopefully when the polls close, Mr. Reid will be eating his lipstick." In Antioch, the developer Roddy Ranch PBC has spent $345,197 to win voter support for Measure K, which would expand the line south of the city to include about 1,000 acres and 700 "executive-style" homes. In Brentwood, the Nunn family, longtime farmers and builders, have spent $514,463 to pass Measure L. If approved, it would enlarge the growth boundary around Brentwood in four places by about 2,100 acres. Eight hundred acres would remain open space, and the rest would support about 2,800 new homes. Environmental and citizen groups, Contra Costa Supervisor Federal Glover and state Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, D-Pittsburg, formed a coalition to defeat the measures. So far, they've only spent money to fight the Pittsburg and Antioch initiatives. In those cities, the environmental groups Save Mt. Diablo, Greenbelt Alliance and the Sierra Club are united in their campaign to stop growth outside of the existing urban limit line. In Brentwood, however, Save Mt. Diablo and the East Bay Regional Parks District cut a deal with the Nunn family and the city. In exchange for several concessions designed to protect farmland and open space around the city, the two groups promised not to oppose Brentwood's Measure L. Greenbelt Alliance's Reid, however, promised a vigorous campaign to defeat Measure L in the final days of the election. "We are opposed to it, but we have not, so far, dedicated any money to it," he said, "because we don't have the money to spend." While the campaign in Brentwood seems a generally one-sided affair, Pittsburg's election season heated up Thursday during a forum at Delta View Elementary School, where Canciamilla faced off with City Councilmen Bill Glynn and Ben Johnson who support Measure P. Johnson said the current urban limit line, which was approved by a countywide vote in 1990 and modified by the board of supervisors in 2000, subverts the city's "local control" of its own growth patterns. "When we don't control our boundaries, we lose as a city," he said. Also, if voters pass the initiative, the city would be able to build the San Marco and Buchanan bypasses to relieve traffic. Canciamilla, who was on the board of supervisors when it voted to move the line in 2000 to exclude from development thousands of acres around Pittsburg, Antioch and Brentwood, said the current line is working to protect open space but hasn't stopped the cities from building new homes and commercial projects. If the measure passes, and Seeno and other developers are allowed to build more homes, the bypasses won't save residents from their current traffic mess, he said. "The traffic you have today is the best traffic you will have," he said, citing studies by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority that show congestion worsening even after eBART is built and Highway 4 is widened. Also, if the city rather than a developer had written the initiative, it would be subject to a thorough environmental review and public comment process. That process would identify any traffic and environmental impacts associated with expanding the city's boundaries, he said. "This short-circuits the process," he said. The growth initiatives were prompted by Contra Costa County's Measure J, a half-cent sales tax passed by voters last year for the $2 billion for transportation projects it generates. Measure J requires all 19 of Contra Costa's cities and the county to abide by a voter-approved urban limit line to receive millions in road repair money. Measure J withholds millions of dollars for street repair and other projects if cities fail to abide by a line by 2009. Canciamilla said that even if voters defeat the developer's measures, the cities will still be able to either create their own new lines or adopt the existing urban limit line. "We won't lose our money. We have until 2009 to adopt our own growth boundary," he said.
### |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
