With two terms on the Thousand Oaks City Council and
several years service as a Planning Commissioner, Councilmember Linda Parks has seen it
all. Hopefully the following article will help open your eyes to
the games that are being played and the subsequent destruction of what once was a peaceful,
safe and enjoyable country community and what is now fast becoming a very busy,
noisy and crowded CITY.
THE
DEVELOPERS PLAYBOOK
by Linda Parks, Councilwoman, City of Thousand Oaks
The games developers play can be very tricky. If you've ever wondered how a
bad development project got approved, the following developer playbook may be
helpful. Learn how developer representations have successfully bilked tax
payers, enticed and intimidated public officials and utilized paid supporters,
Astroturf politics and PR experts, all in the name of development.
Play #1 DEVELOPER-SPEAK
In developer-speak, a rose is definitely not a rose by any other
name. It's all in the verbiage and the use of words can be very misleading. For
example, the infamous approval of the Ahmanson Ranch development (a project that
will connect the San Fernando and Conejo Valleys into one sprawling freeway
backup), came with great sounding gifts for all! The developers were required to
"transfer" thousands of acres of open space to the public. Lesson
learned: "transfer" of open space means the developers pointed to land
and said to the public agencies: "You buy that."
And the public agencies bought it, lock, stock and barrel (after
"transferring" the water rights to the developer to water their
exclusive golf courses). What term you use can make all the difference! Another
example was the developer who discovered after building into a hillside that the
hillside was a landslide and needed remediation. When the remediation work came
forward for hearing, the developer refused to admit there was a landslide,
despite expert opinion to the contrary. The developer maintained that
instead of a landslide it was "a downward slope due to
gravity".
Project approved.
Finally, if your development breaks all the rules, give it a fancy new name
and write rules that allow for it! Ever hear of a "detached
condominium"? They are big houses so close together they might as well be
attached. Forget sidewalks and driveway ramps, a curb will do. Put in roll-up
garage doors because there isn't enough room on the driveway for garage doors
that lift up, and reduce the size of the backyards and side yards and front
yards
so you can build many more of these houses, oops... I mean "detached
condominiums". For maximum efficiency you can do what the pro-growth
majority on the Thousand Oaks City Council did: appoint the developers and their
agents to a committee to draft the new laws that define and allow for the
"detached condominiums" they build.
Play #2: PROMISES; PROMISES
It isn't really a lie; it's just that they never promised us a rose
garden, though it sure seemed so at the time. Like those affordable apartments
that the developer could build if 15 to 30 of the units were kept affordable to
moderate income residents. The developer, choosing between 15 to 30 decided to
make it 15 but then found it hard to find anyone who wants an affordable
apartment, so they converted them to market rate.
Play #3: DEVELOPER MYTHS
When the Ventura County SOAR (Save Open space and Agricultural
Resources) movement began, the development industry fought to keep its power
from being diminished. Even though SOAR doesn't rezone any land and actually
strengthens the General Plan by requiring a vote of the people to change some
zones, the developer myth that SOAR means there won't be enough growth became a
given. To believe this myth you must also believe that the cities and County's
general plans, which by law are our blueprints for growth, do not provide for
adequate growth. Yet these general plans actually call for over 60,000 more
houses to be built by 2020 in Ventura County, accommodating over 200,000 more
people.
Another developer myth that has recently emerged is that there is no sprawl
in Ventura County. To believe this myth you must also believe that building
strip malls and housing developments on farmland and on land zoned for natural
open space is actually good planning. After all, as one fire marshal explained,
"if you cement the hillsides you won't have to worry about brush
fires".
Other common myths that feed the growth machine include: growth is inevitable
so build more; grow or the economy will go bust; smart growth means density;
there really is a point when our city will be built out and there will be no
more growth; the only place to build it is an ancient oak grove; there is no
archeological site there; we didn't see any endangered plants; the area isn't
pristine, rather it has trash dumped there, so develop it; schools are not
overcrowded, we can always add more portables; and my favorite - actually we
were going to build more so this extra growth is really a reduction!
Play #4: BUILD IT OR GET SUED
Litigation and sometimes just the threat of litigation is a major
weapon in the big developer's arsenal. Many a poor decision has been made while
looking down the barrel of a law suit. Government isn't the only benefactor of
legal threats and actions by big developers. When there is a
lot of money at stake, big developers have been known to try to silence
opposition by playing hardball . Their attorneys send threatening letters to
public officials, grassroots groups and residents who speak negatively about
their development. One example is the threatened litigation by Ahmanson Ranch
developer Washington Mutual, because the big bank/developer doesn't like a
grassroots group's website opposing their development. (Check it out at :
www.ahmanson.org).
Play #5: DOG AND PONY SHOWS FOR HIRE
Ever see people come from other cities far away just to praise a
proposed development in your city? Employees of the developers, family members,
contractors, subcontractors, etc. often bussed in by the developer parade in
support of the development project, masquerading as average citizens. Sometimes
it's just a matter of numbers, and when you can add up a majority of people in
support, you win!.
Play #6: ASTROTURF GROUPS
We've all heard of grassroots groups like Save Our Somis, Friends of
the Ventura River, Residents to Preserve Newbury Park, but have you heard of Dos
Vientos Amigos? Or Coalition for Community Planning? The latter two are the
figments of the imagination of public relations firms paid by the development
industry for the purpose of supporting development. "Astroturf" groups
are very popular with developers, particularly in areas where there is
substantial public opposition to their development.
Play #7: ORIGINAL INTENT
Not disclosing the full scope of the development is a proverbial card
up the developer's sleeve. One tried and true developer approach for larger,
phased developments is to piecemeal the project through the permitting process
and not disclose the full scope of the development plans. The theory is get the
permits you know you can get, and then come back later for modifications of the
permit until eventually you get the full development plan approved. While a
developer's disclosure of their true intentions can break a development,
developers can use their knowledge of what won't work to their advantage. Ever
hear of a developer drawing up a design to intentionally have it defeated? It's
a strategy that can open the door for an approval of a less objectionable
(originally intended) project that would otherwise have been rejected.
Play #8: DEVELOPER FUNDS TO ELECTED OFFICIALS
A review of campaign disclosure forms and a little known elected
official account called an "officeholder account" shows that the
development industry is a major funding source for elected officials. There is
nothing illegal about a developer contributing funds to the officeholder account
of an elected official on the same day the elected official votes on that
developer's project. Financial contributions to Council and Board of Supervisor
campaigns make up one of the largest sources of political contributions that are
made to local elected leaders. Does the developer contribution translate into a
vote of approval for their project? The politician who takes the money will
surely tell you "No."
WE THE PEOPLE
Many developments are wonderful, and there are many fine developers
of integrity. Clearly though there are also those that provide a disservice to
the community. Over-development impacts residents, breaks laws, exceeds
standards for noise, air pollution and traffic, taxes our resources and crowds
our schools.
Development proposals can be quite complex and perplexing. Boards and
commissions that make decisions regarding land use are often comprised of
elected officials or their appointees and learn the development process through
on the job training. Add to the proceedings a lack of disclosure, dog and pony
shows, misrepresentations, intimidation and manipulation, and decisions can
become unbalanced. The best counterbalance to developer domination is public
participation. Involvement of concerned citizens is the one equalizer in the
balancing of community needs and development issues. Now that you've learned
some of the major developer plays, its up to the home team to rally for an even
playing field.
Get involved and you'll find that you
can make a difference. It's up to you!
