Morgan Hill – Santa Clara County Supervisors on Monday voted to place a controversial land-use initiative on the November Ballot, thus avoiding the need to hold a separate countywide election.
The board voted 3-0 to consolidate a special election on the “Initiative for the Conservation and Preservation of Hillsides, Ranchlands, and Agricultural Lands.” The action officially lands the citizen-driven initiative on the Nov. 7 general election.
On June 20, the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters certified the initiative after more than 50,000 county residents signed a petition asking for it to be placed to the November ballot. The board approved the petition in June and agreed to submit the initiative to voters.
The aim of the initiative has stirred up controversy in South County, where many landowners think their property rights are being “robbed.” It seeks to limit the amount of housing development that can occur in rural and hillside areas of unincorporated Santa Clara County. Current zoning laws allow one residence for each 20 to 160 acres in hillside areas. If passed, the Santa Clara County General Plan would be amended to allow one residence for each 40 to 160 acres in unincorporated hillside areas.
The initiative was drafted by environmentalists seeking to encourage more urban development and protect hillside views and open spaces for future generations. Palo Alto-based environmental group People For Land and Nature (PLAN) authored the ballot initiative and led the effort to gather signatures.
Proponents hope to make a lasting impression on future zoning with an amendment to the Santa Clara County General Plan would be impossible for supervisors and other politicians to overturn. That is, they want to change county zoning laws in a way only voters would be able to repeal.
“That initiative casts a big shadow, and will be very expensive to manage,” said Supervisor Don Gage, who opposes the initiative.
Gage moved to change some of the language that will appear on the ballot before the supervisors cast their votes. Supervisors removed language that Gage said would have misled voters into thinking the county does not require fire access
to unincorporated areas. They also added language to the initiative on how agricultural landowners could see a reduction in the speculative value of their properties if the initiative passes.
