REDWOOD NEEDLES Presented by the Sierra Club Redwood Chapter Newsletter, The REDWOOD NEEDLES Return to Article Menu Urban Growth Boundary Efforts Wins In Windsor and Novato - Narrow Loss In Fairfield By Jim DeKloe, Solano Group Chair   Urban Growth Boundaries Cities in the Bay Area are using the device of an urban growth boundary (UGB) to contain sprawl. A UGB is a line around a city (outside of the current city limits) that represents the ultimate boundary of the city. Once an UGB is established, developers know that "inside this line, we'll help you develop, but outside the line is strictly off limits." In this way the developers gain certainty about planning, and the community gains economically since expensive infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, fire, police services, etc.) becomes focused into a smaller area. UBGs allow agriculture to continue by minimizing the conflicts that inevitably occur as subdivisions push into farm country. An initiative formalizes the UGB; after an UGB initiative is passed, developers must go to the voters for approval rather than just schmoozing three out of five councilmembers. In the past, UGB initiatives passed handily in Santa Rosa, Sebastapol, Rohnert Park, and Healdsburg. Novato voters passed an UGB initiative in November, and Windsor voters approved their initiative in January. Most UGB initiatives passed with a landslide victory. The San Jose City Council adopted a greenline, and several cities in the south bay are working on them. Last November, an intense and expensive developer effort in the City of Fairfield managed to defeat an urban growth boundary initiative by the slimmest of margins. Narrow Defeat in Fairfield In the November 1997 election, developers squared off with a broad coalition of citizens in a cat-fight that produced the most expensive campaign in Fairfield history. After election officials counted the final absentee ballots, the initiative lost by 63 votes - 49.75% yes to 50.25% no. Background Solano County, at the southern end of the Redwood Chapter, stands at the front line of urban sprawl. Most growth studies project that Solano and Contra Costa Counties will absorb the lion's share of the growth of the nine San Francisco Bay counties. Fairfield city planners wrote an urban growth boundary into their update of the General Plan. Without an initiative this UGB remains toothless. The ink wasn't dry on this General Plan UGB when developers petitioned the city to begin planning on areas outside of the line. But it was Fairfield's plans to build 7,800 houses and an industrial park near Travis Air Force Base, the number one employer in Solano County, that triggered the fight. Citizens Rally A grass roots group, the Citizens' Committee to Protect Travis, formed to oppose these growth plans. They argued that many airports in the United States have been compromised or closed by "urban encroachment." This diverse group started with local Air Force veterans who became convinced that Fairfield's growth plans threatened the Base with encroachment. Growth and environ-mental activists joined later. It was an interesting experience to have the Sierra Club officers working closely with the officers in the local NRA. Once the campaign started, the Bay Area Greenbelt Alliance provided valuable assistance. The Citizen's Committee hired the top environmental law firm of Shute, Mihaly, and Weinberger to write an initiative that would place land near Travis AFB outside the UGB and codify the city's toothless urban growth boundary around the rest of Fairfield. The initiative would effectively prevent the threat of encroaching development around the base and would save the key agricultural valleys at the other end of the city. The group began collecting signatures to qualify the initiative in January 1997, and by April had quickly collected almost twice the required number. The registrar legally qualified the initiative and gave it the name Measure A. The group began vigorous fundraising efforts to prepare for what they expected would be a tough campaign. Early polls showed that the voters favored Measure A by 79% to 13%. The Evil Empire Strikes Back The pro-growth Fairfield City Council initially worked hard against the initiative. They backed off later when polls showed that voters gave them little respect or trust. Local developers hired the public relations firm of Nelson Communications. Nelson Communications has more than 60 employees and offices in Sacramento, Irvine, and San Diego. This places them in the top 20 of PR firms. They cover a broad range of political issues, but seem to specialize in gambling, alcohol, and initiatives like Fairfield's Measure A. They are held on retainer by the California Teachers Association. The main local developer knew Nelson Communications could play hardball and he called them in. He had used them to defeat an anti-gravel mining initiative in neighboringYolo County the previous year by 63% to 33%. In that election, Nelson had stomped the grassroots environmental proponents by creating massive confusion about the initiative in Davis, a university town. The Nelson Group had experience and developers gave them money to burn. The Fairfield grassroots group knew that they had a fight on their hands. A Campaign of Lies Nelson Communications initially set up the Fairfield-Suisun Chamber of Commerce as their front group, and later replaced them with an astroturf (false grassroots) group. Their polling told them that politicians and developers were really unpopular and used that information to form a campaign that charged that politicians and developers were the true interests behind the initiative. They ran newspaper and radio ads and launched a personal attack on a sympathetic member of the Board of Supervisors. They hired a group of phone bank workers out of Sacramento and paid union members from the construction trade to get out the vote. UGB Advocates Run Credible Campaign The Yes on A forces ran a strong campaign. They raised over $ 60,000, and crafted professional looking mail pieces that exposed the developer source of the "No" money. A full page newspaper ad showed a map with areas that would be at risk if the initiative failed. Precinct walkers talked to voters in key precincts and hung door hangers the last weekend. Letters to the editor in favor of the initiative appeared virtually every day in the local newspaper. In the end, they couldn,t get their message out through the confusion created by Nelson. "I voted NO because I want NO DEVELOPMENT." Exit polls showed that three out of ten voters who voted No supported the results that a Yes vote would have produced. The day after the election, the newspaper carried the headline "Measure A loses, Development Can Go Forward;" readers called the newspaper to say, "wait, I voted No so that the development couldn't go forward." The editor said that he's never seen anything like it. The PR firm had successfully pulled off their campaign of confusion. Experience Gained Helps In Windsor If there is a silver lining here, you could say that the experience gained in this campaign helped Greenbelt Alliance in the successful UGB initiative campaign in Windsor. 70% of Novato voters approved their UGB initiative. The cause of UGBs in Solano County has been temporarily set back, but several cities are looking at future initiatives. Urban Growth Boundaries represent the best strategy to counter urban sprawl. Although the Fairfield campaign was a temporary setback, polling data showed how dramatically public opinion supports these efforts. Return to Article Menu Last updated on 2/21/98 Comments or suggestions? Drop us a line at heyneedles@aol.com