Oxnard's Measures won't improve much

With Election 2008 tumbling down the campaign trail, voters will be making some of the most crucial decisions in their lifetimes come November. But this year, as in any election year, many voters would rather not vote than vote and not understand what they are voting for.

This week, two measures that are supposed to improve infrastructure, services and traffic congestion in Oxnard have been at the height of scrutiny: Measure O, the sales tax increase supported by Mayor Tom Holden; and Measure V, the traffic initiative supported by Tim Flynn, councilmember and mayoral candidate.

So far, the sales tax increase has been shot down by numerous residents and businesses. Those who oppose do so for various reasons, including the fact it is a bad time to raise taxes in a volatile economy, and voters are uncertain about exactly where the tax money will be allocated.

Measure V, the traffic initiative is getting almost as few people to stand by it as the sales tax increase. Although it took 15,000 people to get the initiative on the ballot, dozens of local businesses and organizations are scrambling to find as many as possible to oppose the passage of this initiative. So far, the opposition is standing pretty strong.

From where we stand on these issues, neither one of these measures is a good idea.

First off, the city of Oxnard doesn’t have the best reputation amongst the voters regarding transparency in government or money being well spent, which bodes badly for the passage of Measure O. In the Reporter’s June 26 article, “New sales tax shunned in Oxnard,” a number of residents spoke out against the measure.

Staff writer Paul Sisolak wrote, “They [certain residents] opine that city funds have been mismanaged in the past on capital projects with low priority carried out during strapped financial times — work that commenced on the downtown movie theater, municipal golf course and talk of a baseball stadium.”

Then comes the traffic initiative, the antithesis of rapid development from which sprang Oxnard’s slogan for the last several years: Come develop here where developers’ fees are low and the planning process is fast.

Well, the city of Oxnard learned some lessons about low developer fees, which has left the city strapped for cash to improve infrastructure. Flynn is quick to point out that the city should have received about $100 million in developers’ fees, which could have been used to fix the traffic congestion problems at intersections. These congested intersections and the possibility of more traffic problems due to continued development are the only reasons Measure V is even on the ballot in the first place. The loss of this revenue in the past came from the reduction of developers’ fees, which in recent years has been adjusted to generate more funds for the city.

But the real problem with Measure V is the fact that it clearly states any development of more than five homes, or retail, industrial or commercial complex of more than 10,000 square feet must mitigate traffic problems or be approved by the voters if the intersections within a five-mile radius are not free-flowing (approximately a one-minute wait time).

So the developer is caught between a rock and a hard place: Pay to fix numerous intersections that may not even be affected by the particular development or wait for voter approval.

Opponents of this measure said the traffic initiative will essentially scare off developers and consequently lose developers’ fees that would have been paid to the city to fix traffic congestion problems.

The one thing that everyone seems to agree on is the fact that no one wants to pay for any more than already required, residents and developers alike.

While at this time, the Reporter doesn’t endorse Measure O or Measure V, we do feel that some sacrifices will have to be made in order for Oxnard to meet its potential. Oxnard and its development rate can be likened to a well-nourished vine growing up a tree: If the vine isn’t trimmed back, the tree will die. If the voters can’t find a way to regulate growth and take care of its infrastructure, the residents of Oxnard will surely suffer.

While city officials have been working on ways to fix Oxnard Boulevard, the 101 on-ramp at Rice Avenue, and Five Points, a lot of the funding is dependent on new development. But with new development comes more and/or new problems.

In the past, one county in California has come up with a pretty good plan to conquer traffic problems while keeping development going. Fresno County voters passed a traffic initiative called Measure C twice in a row, for a total of 40 years, which is also a half-cent sales tax increase. In this measure, specific jobs, like widening roads and adding bike lanes, will receive specified amounts of money to improve a select area of road. The measure is transparent, and the voters approved of the specific jobs that were to be funded.

If Measure O was more specific like Measure C, or Measure V kept development flowing while focusing on traffic problems as Measure C intended, then voters might be more willing to pass such measures to improve Oxnard. Hopefully, the city of Oxnard will either take the initiative to get the job done without it having to be mandated through a special measure, or will have a better measure come next election that voters can understand and know where the money is going and where improvements will be.