Santa Cruz County Elections

June 9, 1999 Special District Election

Measure O Question:

Shall Ordinance No. 16-ZC-186 of the City of Scotts Valley approving the specific plan, rezoning, and the development agreement for the "Glenwood Project" be adopted?

Measure O is a referendum against the adoption of Ordinance No. 16-ZC-186 which approved the specific plan, rezoning, and development agreement for what is known as the "Glenwood Project" in the City of Scotts Valley. A "Yes" vote by a majority of those voting means that Ordinance No. 16-ZC-186 shall go into effect. A "No" vote by a majority of those voting means that Ordinance No. 16-ZC-186 shall not be adopted.

s/ Robert J. Logan

City Attorney

City of Scotts Valley

We have seen good projects and bad projects in our town. What distinguishes the Glenwood project is that it strikes a careful balance between the need for land preservation and our need for housing.

The Glenwood project guarantees Scotts Valley a substantial, 150 acre, open space preserve at no cost to taxpayers. Currently, the land is private property. Those who use it trespass. As approved, the Plan gives 70 percent of the site to the citizens of Scotts Valley, along with funds to maintain it in perpetuity.

Originally approved for 276 homes, this proposal includes only 145 homes on 45 acres.

The Project uses recycled water. Recycled water will be used for all outdoor irrigation. The project also pays to convert Scotts Valley's largest water users to recycled water. Savings from conversion will equal over 10 times the annual consumption at Glenwood.

Although we're a small town, we have many large infrastructure needs that our City budget cannot afford. This project provides funds for improvements that otherwise will be borne by taxpayers. They include:

Traffic: $1 million to revamp the Glenwood/SV Drive intersection;

Schools: $1.3 million for new facilities; $400,000 per year in new student revenues;

Parks: $725,000 for parks city-wide;

Police: $325,000 for equipment and an additional officer for the high-school;

Recreation: 4 miles of public trails; 10 acre expansion of Siltanen Park, including 4 new ballfields.

There are no offers to buy and preserve the property, nor have there ever been any. This land is zoned for housing. If voters turn down this project, it simply means the City must bargain with another developer or buy the land at taxpayer expense. Our City Council spent 3 years negotiating crucial commitments.

We respectfully request your support.

s/ Randy Johnson, Mayor

s/ Tom Balch, President of Scotts Valley Unified School District

s/ Fred Zanotto, President Skypark Soccer Complex, Business Owner

s/ Virginia T. Allender, Senior Advocate

s/ Cheryl Shapiro, President Scotts Valley Little League

The developer’s proponents seriously misstate or omit several facts:

Including the high school, this development is far larger than originally proposed for the site, and generates 126% more rush hour traffic (more than double).

The development nearly doubles allowable housing densities.

The "dedicated" land is almost entirely undevelopable anyway. Surrounded by tract houses, the remaining "open space" would more closely resemble people’s backyards than actual open space.

The most recent fiscal analysis concludes that servicing this development will cost taxpayers $118,000 annually, and that this cost will exceed project revenues. This means that critical municipal services like police and fire may decline, or your taxes may be raised to subsidize the development.

There is great potential for preserving this assessed $4 million parcel as a public park, but only if the development is defeated. In fact, Assemblymember Fred Keeley has introduced a $1.5 billion state parks bond. Keeley says:

Similarly, Land Trust Director Laura Perry states that if Scotts Valley decides to pursue preservation rather than development of Glenwood, the Land Trust will "enthusiastically lend assistance."

If this measure is defeated, either:

A smaller project will be required, with less visual, traffic, water and school impacts, or

State money and private grants will be obtained to preserve the land outright as a public park.

The choice is yours. We thank you for your consideration.

s/ Sheryl Ainsworth

Scotts Valley City Council Member, President Scotts Valley Educational Foundation 1996-1998

s/ Stephany E. Aguilar

Scotts Valley City Council Member, Former Mayor

s/ Nick Van Bruggen

Save Scotts Valley

s/ Grace M. Sanchez

Parent, Scotts Valley Unified School District Curriculum Council

s/ Katherine Bagley

Teacher, Brook Knoll Elementary

Beware! This measure would approve a huge tract housing project on Scotts Valley’s last, most scenic open space. The 145 unit project would:

Blight Scotts Valley with urban sprawl. Measure O would mar the beauty of our hillsides and meadows, making Scotts Valley more like "South San Jose" and less like Scotts Valley. It would develop nearly every developable inch, and would even change the law to give a foreign bank and a Palo Alto developer special privileges that no local property owner receives! Measure O would allow development on extremely steep slopes and prominent ridgelines, opening the door to impacts citywide, and destroying Scotts Valley’s quality of life forever.

Cause traffic gridlock and hazards by adding over 1000 daily car trips. Along with other development, new traffic will total several thousand daily trips, creating hazardous intersections and threatening safety as well as quality of life.

Threaten our strained water supply, increasing the likelihood of rationing. Our water aquifer’s condition is critical. Approving a huge housing project would be foolish and risky, and could jeopardize truly needed development, such as a town center, medical and recreational facilities.

Overcrowd Our Schools. Our children are already forced into portable classrooms. This development would exacerbate the crisis.

Create Long Term Burdens for Taxpayers. The developer pays one-time fees, while we pay to service the development forever. His fees will never come close to covering our costs. Sprawl will cost us all — in the pocketbook as well as our quality of life.

The developers have a right to reasonable land use, not to this massive development. Their project is simply TOO BIG. Let’s not cash in the irreplaceable beauty and character of Scotts Valley for a bag of promises. We can provide for community needs without selling out community values and quality of life. Please vote NO on this ill-conceived measure!

s/ Stephany E. Aguilar, Scotts Valley City Council Member, former Mayor

s/ Sheryl Ainsworth, Scotts Valley City Council Member, President Scotts Valley Educational Foundation 1996-1998

s/ Katherine Bagley, Teacher, Brook Knoll Elementary

s/ Grace M. Sanchez, Parent, Scotts Valley Unified School District Curriculum Council

s/ Rick Maday, Director, Scotts Valley Water District

TRUTH or SCARE?

You compare.

1. "...huge tract housing project...":

2. "...special privileges...":

The project is consistent with zoning and development conditions throughout Scotts Valley. Significant slopes and prominent ridge lines will be protected.

3. "...causing traffic gridlock..."

Glenwood pays to improve traffic and safety conditions at one of Scotts Valley's worst intersections. The Plan provides $1 million to widen and repair Glenwood/Hacienda/Granite Creek at Scotts Valley Drive. These upgrades are necessary to handle traffic from the new High School. Without Glenwood, there's no money for them.

4. "...likelihood of (water) rationing..."

The project substantially reduces the chance that water rationing will ever be necessary. It includes a recycled water program, a new tank site, and "dual water system" for new homes. The President of the Water District calls the Glenwood Water Agreement "...the most creative and progressive of its kind in the county."

5. "...overcrowding our schools..."

Enrollment has declined in grades K through 5. New students are necessary to maintain critical state funding. Glenwood also provides $1.3 million for new facilities construction.

6. "Long Term Burdens for Taxpayers."

This project pays for its costs, short and long term. Recreation, traffic, public safety, schools and other improvements built into the Plan will be covered by taxpayers unless the Plan goes forward.

Give in to reason. "Yes on O"

s/ Randy Johnson

Mayor

s/ Tom Balch

President of Scotts Valley Unified School District

s/ Fred Zanotto

Zanotto's Family Mkt, President of Skypark

s/ Wendy Brannan

Chair, Scotts Valley Park and Recreation Commission

s/ Cheryl Shapiro

President, Scotts Valley Little League