SOAR RULING COSTS MOORPARK COUNCIL.

Byline: Sylvia L. Oliande Daily News Staff Writer

The decision to let the Moorpark Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources initiative succeed or fail on its own merits has come back to haunt the Moorpark City Council.

A Ventura County judge on Friday ordered the city to pay more than $4,400 in legal fees to the Libertarian Party, which successfully challenged the wording of the SOAR petitions.

Councilman Chris Evans, an outspoken opponent of SOAR, said that despite the judge's order he stands by the council's decision to place the initiative on the ballot based on petition signatures rather than a vote of the council.

He said the SOAR initiative would expose the city to lawsuits by developers, particularly from Messenger Investment Co., the developer of the controversial Hidden Creek Ranch project.

The city is liable for the fees because the residents of Moorpark became responsible for the SOAR initiative when the council voted in June to put it on the ballot.

City officials said the legal fee will be paid out of the city's general fund.

SOAR supporters said the council could have avoided this fee if it had taken the initiative out of the line of fire from the Libertarian lawsuit, as did several other cities countywide when they were presented with similar initiatives.

``The city had every opportunity to avoid this. They knew the signatures were good to begin with,'' said Roseann Mikos, a leader of the SOAR movement in Moorpark.

``It's unfortunate that the council continues to not see that the people want to see this on the ballot. . . . The judge did the right thing. He fined the one entity that refused to listen to the will of the people, and it makes perfect sense.''

In making their decision, some council members said they were concerned that the initiative leaves the city open to lawsuits from developers since it rescinds the city's General Plan, adopted in 1992.

Mayor Patrick Hunter, who voted with the majority in June, but only after he was unable to raise enough support to put the initiative on the ballot by council action, said he was not surprised by the court's decision.

``This is exactly why there is such a high level of mistrust for government,'' he said. ``It was clear that all the people wanted was to vote on this issue.''

As a result of the lawsuit, the original SOAR initiative was taken off the Nov. 3 ballot, but another initiative is expected to appear on a special election ballot in January.