MOORPARK FACES BALLOT DUEL; COMPETING MEASURES TARGET PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

Byline: Sylvia L. Oliande Daily News Staff Writer

Moorpark voters are going to the polls on Tuesday to decide on two measures that will send a message to city leaders and slow-growth activists about how much control residents want to have over population expansion.

First on the ballot is Measure S, the citizen-sponsored Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources initiative that was thrown off the November ballot after a court found flaws in its petition.

Measure T is the referendum designed to affirm or throw out the council's approval in August of the development agreement for the Hidden Creek Ranch project.

People on both sides of the debate said they were not sure how their message was received by voters and how that would affect the outcome of the election.

``I believe there are a lot of people who still do not have a clear understanding of the issues, but I'm confident that if they receive the facts of our project they are more likely to vote for Measure T than oppose it,'' said Gary Austin, vice president of Messenger Investment Co.

Roseann Mikos, a longtime project foe, said she and her group are confident going into the election.

``Some would rather ignore the negative effects of this project,'' she said. ``I believe the people of Moorpark believe the negatives outweigh the positives.''

Even the City Council, in its current make-up, is sharply divided on the issue.

Mayor Patrick Hunter, the only member of the council to vote against the project in August, officially came out against Measure T and for Measure S. And Clint Harper, who was elected to the council in November, has not been a part of the vote but is soundly against the project.

On the flip side, Councilman Chris Evans remains a strong supporter of the project because of the benefits he said it will bring. And John Wozniak, who changed his vote after key concessions were made to handle traffic, has said he believes there are several benefits to the project.

Councilwoman Debbie Rodgers took herself out of discussion of the project after opponents questioned whether she had a conflict of interest because of her position as a Realtor.

One point of contention between the two sides is whether or not the city already has a SOAR ordinance, which draws a boundary in which development can occur without voter approval. Anything outside of that line has to go to a vote.

In November, voters in Moorpark, along with those in other cities, passed a growth ordinance establishing a curb-line boundary. The Moorpark measure was not one authored by the leaders of the SOAR movement.

The city's Measure F was based on a similar document that included the Hidden Creek Ranch project in the curb-line as outlined in the 1992 general plan, while the SOAR initiative specifically did not include it.

Austin said that the Moorpark SOAR initiative was different from those of other cities, and that the city's measure was closer to the spirit of the countywide movement than Measure S is.

But SOAR supporters said Measure S is the true SOAR, while the city's Measure F is a watered-down version of it.

Hunter said the SOAR initiative is consistent with others in the county and would provide more protection against overtaxing the city's infrastructure.

``Measure S represents sound public policy by encouraging growth within currently incorporated jurisdictions who are better prepared to provide necessary municipal services,'' he said.

One issue on which the vote may hinge is the planned Highway 118 bypass, for which $12 million is included in the project's development agreement.

At a recent town hall meeting sponsored by the developer, many residents stepped up to the microphone to query Messenger representatives about the timing, funding and reality of building that bypass.

The developers conceded that it will take a lot of effort on the part of the city, the county and Caltrans, as well as financial commitments from other developers wanting to build within city limits. But, they said, it will happen.

Opponents said the development should not be judged merely on the idea that it may help build the bypass, because there are other factors out of the developer's control.

Still, many in the town hall audience echoed what project supporters have been saying, that development is inevitable in the small city and it is better if it involves a plan.

As Wozniak said in a recent letter, ``master-planned communities like Hidden Creek are the antithesis of urban sprawl.

``Ironically, if we do not utilize the specific plan process, we encourage fragmentated, irregular, unpredictable piecemeal development that will look like the San Fernando Valley,'' he said, noting many residents' fears of development.

But opponents point to the several projects in the planning phases now that will bring a infusion of residents to the city. They said that those proposed for the northwestern end of town would increase the population from 29,000 to about 43,000.

Hidden Creek would add an additional 10,000.

In addition to 3,221 single-family homes, the Hidden Creek project is expected to include a commercial center on the east side, and up to two golf courses.

The developer is expected to dedicate 2,200 acres of land as permanent open space - though opponents point to the thousands of acres of current open space on which the project will be built.

Hidden Creek's primary access is to be at Collins and Campus Drive near Moorpark College. His development agreement is expected to bring in more than $50 million for road improvements and amenities.

If voters decide to reject the development agreement on Tuesday, Messenger would have to go back into negotiations with the city to gain approval again with a different plan.

Developer Bill Messenger said he is prepared to take the project as far as he has to in order to build.