Measure B unties the hands of traffic experts

As someone who has twice served as a traffic commissioner, I'm in strong support of Measure B. As a traffic commissioner, I listen to many people with serious neighborhood traffic problems. Too often our hands are tied on the traffic commission, and we cannot help them.

With Measure B in place, residents will be better empowered, and that's why I urge a "yes" vote.

The circulation element of our General Plan states, "The city shall maintain a level of service C on all roads and at all intersections. Lower levels of service may be tolerated to preserve or enhance landscaping and aesthetic integrity."

Measure B will add the words, "upon consent of the voters." It will apply only to very large projects with terrible traffic that have the potential to make our infrastructure fail.

So why is there such uproar?

I believe opponents don't want you to know that the assumptions in the city's report were made to arrive at the "worst case scenario." It assumed that all future development, even already approved projects and vested ones such as Los Robles Hospital, will be stopped forever if the voters have their say. This report also did not consider how much productivity is lost or fuel costs wasted due to time sitting in gridlock.

It doesn't take an expert to know that traffic is only going to get worse as we build more than 6.2 million more square feet of development.

How this growth will affect air quality and emergency response times should be considered because once a project is approved, its traffic impacts are forever.

We live in a democracy, and as any good capitalist might say, make it worth my inconvenience or don't bother me.

Why resort to scare tactics? In the future, it will be up to the voters to decide if they feel the benefits of certain new large developments are more important than the negative traffic impacts on their quality of life.

Please join me in voting yes on Measure B on June 3.

Thomas R. Gregory, II

Thousand Oaks