I am unable to find, in my examination of relevant documents, any hint of the smoking gun of underhanded land grabbing that was alleged in Mrs. Chapman's recent letter. It seems to me that in our current highly charged and increasingly polarized political environment, we must all strive, as citizens seeking a common good for the community, to be particularly rigorous in our research of the facts and analysis before we leap publicly onto the slippery slope of hyperbole and innuendo.There are more than enough legitimate issues for us to debate in the coming months as we near the election. Understanding that there is much passion on both sides of the issues of "Measure F," I believe that we will move the dialogue along most effectively, and have less lasting civic damage here in Santa Paula, if we maintain a fact-based and rational approach to the discourse.Marsha ReaSanta PaulaForum appreciatedTo the Editor:Thanks to the Chamber of Commerce and the Mexican-American Chamber of Commerce for sponsoring the forum concerning Measure F (Santa Paula Revitalization Initiative). It was well organized, and professionally conducted. Tracy Lehr, co-anchor, KEYT, was an excellent moderator.I'm glad I had the opportunity to hear both views as to what Measure F will do for Santa Paula. Many questions were answered, and many others were raised. Measure F is not simple and the results of this vote will have tremendous impact on the future of Santa Paula. I'm looking forward to attending the Candidates Forum in September.Thanks to the present City Council for waiving fees for the use of the Community Center for this forum. Thanks to the merchants who supplied the much appreciated refreshments.Rosann MearsSanta PaulaOur tax moneyTo the Editor:Corporate America, together with its lover corporate Government, have shot themselves on the big toe. Their prenuptial agreement is now public knowledge, and the American investor or the taxpayer is part of it.The words "creative accounting" have exposed and educated the world to an American byproduct of our free enterprise system. Free for those creators of creative accounting, and any offshoot, like in "offshore."All media have now agreed that all financial securities and daily stock reports will move over to the cooking channel. Recently, the flagship of California counties, Orange County, showed us where this creative process will take us, bankruptcy!The role and obligation that each and every one of us has is to demand from our city councils that an independent, uninterested firm conduct a detailed audit, thorough and complete.The Santa Paula City Council was poised and had agreed upon spending $700,000 for Mr. McDermott's firm to fight the U.S. Department of Justice, so why quibble over $50,000, and clear the books once and for all. Let's welcome our incoming city manager and financial officers with a clean set of books.We the citizens must take charge.Jess VictoriaPresident,Citizens for Accountable GovernmentSanta PaulaIsn't Fagan enough?To the Editor:Since when do editorial letters become featured articles? Answer: When they serve to promote a cause heralded by the editor. In this case, Marsha Rae's long-winded "press release" calling for Adams Canyon development. Her "Model for the Future" paints a glamorous picture of a perfect community molded by an honest and respectful developer who is committed to working with the citizens of Santa Paula "as partners in the concept and design process." Her letter and others sound as if they were written by a slick public relations firm. Has any developer ever made it a priority to serve the community's needs first and not their own? The developers are here to make a big profit and when they are gone our town will be left with a whole bunch of ugly high end homes in a distant canyon and two VERY segregated communities. I wouldn't be at all surprised if our city government decides to move on over to the more up-scale "other side," abandoning our beautiful old town. This has been known to happen.Let's talk facts shall we. Who will pay for the necessary upgrades in infrastructure all over town? You will. Expect to see your taxes and utilities soar. Expect to see eminent domain seize neighboring farmland for related projects tied to development. Expect more pollution. More noise. More traffic. More people. EXPECT SPRAWL.Now, from what I hear, the biggest complaint about living here is the deteriorating downtown environment. And you want to invite in an out-of-state corporation, whose track record you know nothing about, to solve this problem? Doesn't that seem foolish. I say, start with a city that is non-divisive and committed to attracting small businesses here. What did Ventura do to kick off its revitalization? It opened a new theater complex. Our historic Tower Theater sits on Main rotting away. Guess who owns it? The City of Santa Paula. Why don't they have the incentive to improve our downtown you wonder. Would they rather court developers than solve their own problems? I think the answer is yes. Can you imagine our inexperienced and unmotivated City successfully managing a complicated development in Adams when there was another that was recently approved for Fagan? Have we forgotten, 500 to 1,000 homes will be built there. People, really, isn't that enough for now?Santa Paula is an agricultural jewel that deserves more than what our city government has to offer us. We must not let this gung-ho developer interfere with our ability to manage and create a richly rewarding environment based on our desires and needs. We live here and they don't.Lotar ZiesingSanta PaulaDefining thoughtsTo the Editor:I was recently interested in researching the difference between two words. I hunted up my handy dictionary. The first word is "statesman," which means "one engaged in public or national affairs, especially a political leader who shows wisdom and distinction in promoting the public good." The second word is "politician," which according to the dictionary means "one who is active in politics," "one who is skilled in political maneuvering," "usually has derogatory overtones in referring to one who pursues a career in party politics and manipulates the party system to advance his own or the interests of a limited constituency."The definition of "politician" brings to mind a Santa Paula Councilwoman, one Laura Espinosa, who with her followers, continually are plotting to undermine the good things that other councilpersons are doing. I have watched her for more than seven years as my husband and I have been involved in local politics and I am sure that Santa Paulans are ready to dump her!Don Johnson's name popped into my head when I read the meaning of "statesman." He HAS shown much wisdom in promoting the public good. He has devoted his energy and time for eight years. Santa Paula will miss you Don!Alice MensingSanta Paula
Letters to the Editor
September 13, 2002
Opinion
Where is Steve Salas?
To the Editor:Over the past six years we have been regular attendees at City Council meetings. In the last few months it has been noticed that the Deputy City Clerk, Josie Herrera, has been the reliable, there all of the time, person. We have always been under the impression that she was the assistant to the City Clerk and yet she has been at meetings alone most of the time. Why isn't Steve Salas, your elected City Clerk, attending meetings?I am curious...this is probably not a citizen's business but is she being compensated for doing the City Clerks job.Bill MensingSanta PaulaChamber ForumTuesday night, I attended the Chamber of Commerce and Mexican-American Chamber of Commerce Forum on Measure "F," the inclusion of Adams Canyon into our City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB). John Wisda, a local real estate agent and candidate for City Council spoke for voting "no." Greg Boyd of Santa Paula Development Partners presented arguments for voting "yes."The format and organization were excellent. The moderator read the questions and stated the amount of time each man had to answer.But, at one point, Mr. Wisda stopped discussing Measure F and began campaigning to get votes for himself and two other City Council candidates - whom he named.Having already listened to Mr. Wisda abuse the forum by labeling and mis-characterizing the "other" candidates, I stood up and calmly said, "Excuse me. I object to this campaigning by a candidate." Others must have agreed, because a cheer went up around the room. We had come for a discussion of arguments on Measure F, not a personal attention grab by Mr. Wisda. It was shut down. A number of times, Mr. Wisda stated (still campaigning), "There are three pro-Pinnacle candidates." (Pinnacle is the company Mr. Boyd is or was associated with in Arizona.)I believe Mr. Wisda meant to include me when he made this statement. I'd like to rebut that. I am not a "pro-Pinnacle" candidate for City Council.I am a supporter of "Measure F" and that is because it is limited to placing Adams Canyon in the CURB boundary. Measure F does not approve the construction of one house or building.Fagan Canyon is already in the CURB line. Fagan also has no approvals for any construction and both it and Adams face a long and rigorous process to pass engineering, environmental and fiscal muster before any development approvals would be granted.There are good technical planning reasons as well as important negotiating reasons to have both Adams and Fagan in our CURB line. Simply put, we must not rely on Fagan Canyon as our only other option for growth. And, we must not rely on what the county might or might not do with Adams Canyon if it stays outside the CURB.There will be many opportunities for opponents to stop development in Adams Canyon. The Annexation Plan, the Specific Plan and the Environmental Impact Report will be presented in years to come. I'm certain the rounds of public hearings at those times will be intense. Saying "no" now, prematurely, on this CURB vote is a bad decision for our city.Finally, I have spent many hours the past year listening to employees of low-income developer Cabrillo EDC - many more hours than I have spent listening to the Adams Canyon people. I have also listened to the Fagan people. I will listen to anyone who attends a hearing or writes to the paper and, of course, I pay attention to the fiscal, engineering and environmental experts. That is not pro-anything. It is competent, skilled, due-diligence. Thank you.Rita GrahamSanta PaulaWisda is RightTo the Editor:I agree with Richard Mane's letter last Friday lauding Council Candidate John Wisda's compelling responses (I believe Mr. Mane referred to "hits") debunking Pinnacle Corporation in the Measure "F" debate, despite the hostile and unruly behavior of the Pinnacle people. Thank you Santa Paula Chamber for recognizing the need for voter facts and hosting this forum.Simply stated, Pinnacle Corporation desperately wants you to surrender your right to vote on what happens in your own backyard, to their agents.It became clear to me during Candidate Wisda's presentation that Pinnacle needs Measure "F" in order to return to "Council Majority", only 3 of 5 City Council votes required to work their Adam's Canyon investment, because it can't pass muster with the voters.If Measure "F" passes, just 3 votes from a city of 30,000 residents will be all Pinnacle needs to create urban sprawl west of town. Why consult you anymore? Measure "F" is designed to make things vastly easier for Pinnacle Development Corporation. No more messy public disclosures, just backroom deals with 3 city politicians.In November I'm going to choose to keep my right under current law to vote directly on any new urban sprawl development. I won't surrender my family's future to a 3 vote "Council Majority". Thank you John Wisda for revealing the facts.My debate report card? Council candidate Wisda gets an "A". Pinnacle Corporation's development Measure gets an "F".Jeff NovakSanta Paula, CARE: Joy Chapman LetterTo the Editor:As were many Times readers recently, I was surprised and troubled by allegations set out in Mrs. Joy Chapman's recent letter to you regarding purportedly egregious improprieties in the development of the Estancia/Pinnacle Peak area of Scottsdale, Arizona by John Lang, of The Pinnacle Development Group and Santa Paula Development Partners.In light of Mrs. Chapman's very personalized charges against Mr. Lang and Greg Boyd, his partner in Santa Paula Development Partners, it seemed prudent and, indeed, incumbent on me to determine, if only for myself, what the facts of the matter were. In the course of my efforts to set the matter straight in my own mind, I reviewed a number of documents, from a variety of sources in Arizona that set out the following facts. I would like to share them with you:* In December of 1990, John Lang acquired approximately 620 acres of undeveloped land surrounding Pinnacle Peak, on the outskirts of Scottsdale, AZ, which would eventually become known as "Estancia". In doing so he assumed approximately $12.5MM of outstanding debt to the Arizona State Land Department, as part of a purchase agreement with the State taken on by the previous owner as well as 2.5 million in trade payables. The property, at the time of Lang's acquisition, was zoned by the City of Scottsdale for 484 homes, a golf course and a 525-room resort hotel. For that zoning accommodation, the previous owner had agreed to deed 185 acres to the City for a park prior to opening the golf course.* Prior to 1994, a Supreme Court Case established what is known as the Dolan Amendment, which prohibited governmental jurisdictions from the taking of property in return for "reasonable zoning." This rendered invalid the City's original requirement of the previous owner, for deeding185 acres to the City for a park.* In developing his vision for the Estancia project, in 1994 Lang proposed major changes in the original zoning plan to the City of Scottsdale, creating a less dense and more civically friendly plan for the property. He reduced the total number of homes to 383, and eliminated the hotel in its entirety; leaving in place, only the golf course from the original plan. In addition, recognizing the historic and cultural importance of Pinnacle Peak itself to community, Lang proposed making an unsolicited gift to the City of 155 acres of the upper portions of the peak, highly prized by hikers and horseback riders. It was agreed that his donation of the parkland to the City would take place when the golf course was ready to be opened.* When, in 1995, Lang notified Mayor Herb Drinkwater, mayor of Scottsdale, that the golf course was ready to open, and that he was ready to start the process of gifting the parkland to the City, the City informed him that it was not then in a position to accept the land, because it had neither a Park Management Plan nor appropriate infrastructure in place to maintain the property. Mr. Lang agreed to hold the park site for the City, and did so until the City was able to take title to it in 1998. However, recognizing Mr. Lang had met his commitment, the City of Scottsdale and the Arizona State Land Department, approved the opening of the golf course and issued all the necessary permits. Estancia opened in November 1995 and was named the "#1 New Golf Course in the World" by Golf Digest Magazine along with numerous other national accolades* In addition to the park donation, Lang offered to design, build and fund (at an additional cost of approximately $450,000) a trail system for access to the park site for the public, at no cost to the City. The appraised value of the gift of the parkland and site improvements by Mr. Lang to the City of Scottsdale in 1998, was approximately $12MM.* After the site had been donated, the City of Scottsdale was not ready to open the park and kept it fenced until April 2002 when it was finally ready to open the park to the public.* The Arizona State Land Department was paid in full and during the entire period of design and construction of Estancia, Mr. Lang, and he company were never in default. Mr. Lang enjoys a strong relationship with the Arizona State Land Department and is currently under negotiations to acquire a State owned site for the construction of a church.
