New business district gets lukewarm reception
T.O. Boulevard looking for clout
By Sophia Fischer
sfischer@theacorn.com

Not all property owners support a new business improvement district on a portion of Thousand Oaks Boulevard. Also fueling controversy is the involvement of the city council.

The Thousand Oaks Boulevard Association, which represents most property owners, has pursued the business district for several years. The proposed district affects 223 property owners and targets 303 parcels between Duesenberg Drive and Moorpark Road on Thousand Oaks Boulevard and adjacent commercial streets.

The district would allow owners to develop a unified plan covering beautification, traffic, parking, advertising and marketing.

However, more than 50 percent of property owners must sign a petition to vote on the matter, and in November only 45.5 percent of owners signed the petition supporting formation of the district.

That’s when district organizers appealed to the city for its support. The city owns nearly 9 percent of the affected property, including the Thousand Oaks Civic Arts Plaza, and was asked to cast the deciding vote.

By submitting its vote, the city pushed support for the election to more than 50 percent, which pushed the ballot issue forward.

Ballots were mailed out in late November and are due Jan. 5. According to state law, more than half of the ballots must be returned. If that occurs, the majority vote will win. The city council will count the ballots at its Jan. 11 meeting.

City becomes involved

During discussions in November, Mayor Claudia Bill-de la Peña opposed city involvement.

"I have no problem with this if there are sufficient property owners who will sign the petition, but for the city to become involved in this strikes me as unwise," she said. "Government should not get involved in business matters."

The issue surfaced briefly at the council’s Dec. 14 meeting when discussion arose whether the council could rescind its vote. Only Councilmember Dennis Gillette stuck with his original decision to permit the city to vote.

According to Gary Wartik, city economic development manager, the city is investigating whether it can rescind its vote.

"The council has heard and studied the issue and voted, Gillette said. "As steward of this land, the city property would benefit significantly from this issue and I feel it’s the right action."

Fueling the debate over whether the city should vote is the core issue: Is a business district really wanted by property owners?

Some feel the district will offer protection, others say it’s just an excuse to raise money through assessments that will benefit only a few.

Boulevard Association President Cal Johnston represents a group that supports forming a T.O. business district.

Johnston has pursued the district for years, and said he wants to create a unified plan addressing beautification, traffic, parking, advertising and marketing.

"We can revitalize and beautify the boulevard if we are organized and have a small budget to do plans and studies and work with the city to implement them," Johnston said. "Without our own budget we can only go so far."

He said the city vote is appropriate because the city owns property and will pay an assessment just like other property owners.

"The city council should be voting based upon what is best for the city and for citizens," Johnston said.

Some owners opposed

Paul Burns, owner of Paul Burns Pacific Construction, Inc. and other properties in the proposed district, disagrees with Johnston.

Burns said he didn’t even know the city had agreed to send out ballots until he received one in the mail. He immediately sent a letter to small property owners advising them not to support the district, and, in a letter to City Manager Phil Gatch, he asked the city to excuse itself from voting.

Burns feels the district will benefit large property owners at the expense of smaller owners.

"The ballot packet contains a smoke screen," Burns said. "What they don’t point out is that property owners are going to get hit with this assessment over five years."

Each property would be assessed based on several factors including building square footage, linear frontage and lot size. The larger the property, the higher the assessment. Voting is weighted using the same formula, which is why the city’s ownership of the huge Civic Arts parcel swayed the outcome.

The assessment would generate about $100,000 each year for the five-year period; the average assessment would be about $500.

In 1999, a group of property owners obtained a $2 million state grant to beautify the west end of the boulevard with lighting, landscaping, park benches, canopies and bike racks.

All that’s missing, said Henry Valdez, co-owner of Enrique’s Mexican Restaurant, is circular medians to beautify the center of the boulevard and offer safe pedestrian crossing.

"When Cal says the boulevard looks ugly, I disagree," Valdez said. "We don’t need consultants. Thirty studies have already been done. I’m all for making improvements, but you have to take the right course of action."

Rumors that the district is being formed to allow certain property owners to build multi-story parking garages or residential housing on the boulevard, are untrue, said David Gulbranson, who owns more than 20 parcels in the proposed district.

"We have mixed use, setbacks, height restrictions, parking requirements and every one of those ordinances affect our property values," Gulbranson said. "We’re fighting the battle individually and losing. We need to organize so that we can develop our properties to the best of their potential."