A recent legal and economic analysis found that the proposed "Save the Strawberry Growing Fields Act of 2006" would cost Carlsbad taxpayers between $28.5 million to $36.5 million to implement and could result in significant litigation by property owners that the City would be required to defend.
The study analyzes the effect of the initiative, which calls for changing the current general plan and zoning of the land, which is currently open space, public utilities, and travel/Recreation Commercial. If it passes, it would create a new land use designation of coastal agricultural.
To perform the analysis, the City hired the law firm of McDougal, Love, Eckis, Smith, Boehmer & Foley and the economic consulting firm of Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
The independent analysis was performed to assist Carlsbad voters and the City council in understanding the full impacts of a proposed citizens' initiative. Under the Elections Code 9212, cities may authorize a report on proposed initiatives within 30 days of the official certification of the petition. A 9212 report looks at seven specific areas, including: fiscal impact; effect and consistency with current city general and specific plans; effect on the ability of the city to meet regional housing needs; impact on infrastructure of all types, including transportation, schools, parks and open space; impact on the city's ability to attract and retain business and employment; impact on vacant parcels; impact on redevelopment areas, traffic congestion, open space and agricultural land and finally, any other issues the legislative body requests in the report.
Another $2.8 to $3 million could be lost annually to the City's general fund from lower property, sales, tourist occupancy taxes and other municipal revenue that would have been generated from business and tourist activity. Additionally, Carlsbad citizens could be asked to spend a significant amount of taxpayer dollars to achieve the initiative's stated goals through possible purchase of the land and/or subsidies to landowners to ensure that the lands are kept in perpetual agricultural use.
Further, the study found, since the state Coastal Commission has ultimate land use authority over much of the area, any proposed change in zoning would be subject to their approval. In other words, any proposed initiative would basically be advisory, directing the city to pursue the required land use changes and seek Coastal commission approval. The cost and staff resources associated with pursuing this are unknown.
Other impacts to the City are:
$21 million to $28.9 million to purchase the land from the current owners at fair market value.
$7.2 million in lost development fees.
$3 million in lost property taxes, sales taxes, and hotel room taxes each year.
$704,000 to $729,000 in revenue to the city in redevelopment fees.
$700,000 to relocate the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation’s nature center building on Cannon Road.
The loss of some 900 potential jobs.
Potential on-going subsidies to keep the land in agricultural use. (The initiative goes further than the current Flower Fields agreement by calling for perpetual maintenance of agricultural uses, including land where such uses are not in operation currently.)
Loss of open space. (The imitative affects land that is currently part of the City's Habitat Management Plan. The legal implications of this requirement could leave the city open to challenges by environmental regulatory agencies.)
Additionally, if the City of Carlsbad is forced to purchase a 50-acre parcel currently designated in the City's General Plan for Travel/Recreation Commercial, the cost could be $9.9 million. The study found that the proposed maintenance of agricultural use could potentially propose a significant fiscal liability to enforce the initiative's intent.
Not to mention that current property owners, including San Diego Gas and Electric, may engage in a costly legal challenge against the City of Carlsbad. Company representatives have made their intentions clear that SDG&E will pursue its rights in court.
Finally, it's important to remember that this initiative does not affect the famous The Flower Fields? attraction. This property is protected against development due to an agreement enacted by the City Council in 1993. Although the agreement between the city and the property owner allows for the owner to sell the property, the city has the first rights to buy the property. Any change from flower production would be subject to a lengthy public process.
On July 25, the City Council reviewed the recommendations of a 25-member citizen's committee. Based on those recommendations, the Council will decided at its August 1 meeting whether to incorporate the Committee's recommendations into the City's initiative, adopt one of the initiatives, and/or put an initiative written by the City on the ballot.
The study analyzes the effect of the initiative, which calls for changing the current general plan and zoning of the land, which is currently open space, public utilities, and travel/Recreation Commercial. If it passes, it would create a new land use designation of coastal agricultural.
To perform the analysis, the City hired the law firm of McDougal, Love, Eckis, Smith, Boehmer & Foley and the economic consulting firm of Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
The independent analysis was performed to assist Carlsbad voters and the City council in understanding the full impacts of a proposed citizens' initiative. Under the Elections Code 9212, cities may authorize a report on proposed initiatives within 30 days of the official certification of the petition. A 9212 report looks at seven specific areas, including: fiscal impact; effect and consistency with current city general and specific plans; effect on the ability of the city to meet regional housing needs; impact on infrastructure of all types, including transportation, schools, parks and open space; impact on the city's ability to attract and retain business and employment; impact on vacant parcels; impact on redevelopment areas, traffic congestion, open space and agricultural land and finally, any other issues the legislative body requests in the report.
Another $2.8 to $3 million could be lost annually to the City's general fund from lower property, sales, tourist occupancy taxes and other municipal revenue that would have been generated from business and tourist activity. Additionally, Carlsbad citizens could be asked to spend a significant amount of taxpayer dollars to achieve the initiative's stated goals through possible purchase of the land and/or subsidies to landowners to ensure that the lands are kept in perpetual agricultural use.
Further, the study found, since the state Coastal Commission has ultimate land use authority over much of the area, any proposed change in zoning would be subject to their approval. In other words, any proposed initiative would basically be advisory, directing the city to pursue the required land use changes and seek Coastal commission approval. The cost and staff resources associated with pursuing this are unknown.
Other impacts to the City are:
$21 million to $28.9 million to purchase the land from the current owners at fair market value.
$7.2 million in lost development fees.
$3 million in lost property taxes, sales taxes, and hotel room taxes each year.
$704,000 to $729,000 in revenue to the city in redevelopment fees.
$700,000 to relocate the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation’s nature center building on Cannon Road.
The loss of some 900 potential jobs.
Potential on-going subsidies to keep the land in agricultural use. (The initiative goes further than the current Flower Fields agreement by calling for perpetual maintenance of agricultural uses, including land where such uses are not in operation currently.)
Loss of open space. (The imitative affects land that is currently part of the City's Habitat Management Plan. The legal implications of this requirement could leave the city open to challenges by environmental regulatory agencies.)
Additionally, if the City of Carlsbad is forced to purchase a 50-acre parcel currently designated in the City's General Plan for Travel/Recreation Commercial, the cost could be $9.9 million. The study found that the proposed maintenance of agricultural use could potentially propose a significant fiscal liability to enforce the initiative's intent.
Not to mention that current property owners, including San Diego Gas and Electric, may engage in a costly legal challenge against the City of Carlsbad. Company representatives have made their intentions clear that SDG&E will pursue its rights in court.
Finally, it's important to remember that this initiative does not affect the famous The Flower Fields? attraction. This property is protected against development due to an agreement enacted by the City Council in 1993. Although the agreement between the city and the property owner allows for the owner to sell the property, the city has the first rights to buy the property. Any change from flower production would be subject to a lengthy public process.
On July 25, the City Council reviewed the recommendations of a 25-member citizen's committee. Based on those recommendations, the Council will decided at its August 1 meeting whether to incorporate the Committee's recommendations into the City's initiative, adopt one of the initiatives, and/or put an initiative written by the City on the ballot.