See Also: Index of all Measures

• Official WWW Site

The initiative provides that the General Plan Review Commission shall draft a new General Plan that would be submitted to the voters within two years after the measure is passed. The new General plan shall become effective if approved by the voters. If voters reject the plan, the Board of Supervisors would be required to submit a revised plan to the voters for consideration. If the voters reject the Revised Plan, the Board of Supervisors would be authorized to proceed with the adoption of a further revised General Plan consistent with the principles of the initiative.

The initiative also provides that for a period of two years the General Plan may not be amended to redesignate land from agricultural or open space to a residential use without voter approval.

A YES VOTE will set a two year limitation on the conversion of agricultural lands to residential land use designations in the unincorporated portion of the County until a new, comprehensive General Plan is adopted by the voters which would be prepared by a General Plan Review Commission following guiding principles to establish policies that promote farmland preservation, discourage urban sprawl, and require each development project to pay its own way.

A NO VOTE will retain the County's current General Plan policies and permit the Board of Supervisors to amend the General Plan in response to the changing needs of Stanislaus County residents pursuant to State planning and zoning law.

Measure L requires responsible planning and growth control by putting local citizens in the driver's seat when it comes to preparing a new General Plan and let's the voters decide if the new General Plan does what they want. When developing the new General Plan, local citizens would consider policies that would make sure that our agricultural heritage and quality of life are protected, urban sprawl is limited and growth is adequately planned for and pays it own way.Measure L restricts conversion of agriculture land for residential uses until a new General Plan is adopted. Help develop a responsible plan for the future growth that is coming. Vote YES on Measure L.

/s/ Kevin Chiesa

President, Stanislaus County Farm Bureau

If it were only that simple. In reality, the Board of Supervisors now has the freedom to do everything listed above without this vote. They are just offer this to make themselves look better following their Crows Landing and Salida fiascos. Measure L? No!

All the reasons they give for needing responsible growth is exactly what the County has failed to do over and over again. Look at the county residential areas around our cities; lacking planning and infrastructure needs like sewer, sidewalks, and lighting.

The Sups say they will let you vote on the General Plan. True. But if you turn it down a couple of times, then they are free to enact any General Plan they, and their big-time developer friends, want. It gives developers open season on our agricultural lands. Measure L? No!

The Board says this restricts conversion of Ag Land for residential until a new General Plan is adopted. Again, sound very good. Actually, this is the biggest fake of all. It lets their developer friends in Crows Landing and Salida have their development without any worry of anyone else sitting at the banquet table. They have a monopoly. What more could they ask of "their" Supervisors.

Not just no, "L? NO!"

/s/ Charles Neal,

former Riverbank Mayor

It's time to say NO;

"L NO" to their tricks.

"L NO" to the Loss of farmland and the Supervisors' Lies about protecting farmland while they commit over 6,000 acres of prime farmland (Salida-over 3,000, Crows Landing-over 3,000) to concrete and congestion.

"L NO" to the phony Lure of empty promises to hear the public. Don't get hooked! Ask a Westsider if they trust these Supervisors.

"L NO" to Supervisors who took away your vote on Salida. Over 30,000 citizens signed a petition to vote on the Salida growth and they still won't let you.

"L NO" to the Supervisors being Loose with your tax dollars. Board of Supervisors paid Bay Area developers $400,000 after not letting you vote.

"L NO" to this Lousy plan. The Supervisors will pack the committee with developer friends. If you don't like it, too bad! This lets the Supervisors enact the plan you vote against.

"L NO" to this Loser plan designed to protect the developers from the taxpayers. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Vote NO on L.

Respectfully,
s/ Robert Weatherbee, Turlock area farmer & former County Planning Commission member

s/ E. Timothy Parker, former Newman City Council member

s/ Phil Rockey, former Oakdale City Council member

s/ Tim Fisher, former Modesto City Council member

s/ Garrad Marsh, Modesto City Council member

Measure L does not cause or result in any loss of farmland, and it's not about our County Supervisors. It's about placing you - the citizens - in the driver's seat to help plan the County's future.

Measure L requires broad-based public participation in developing growth policies that will be the guiding document, the constitution, for all future development in the County. County voters decide if the new General Plan got it right.

Measure L is about proper planning for future growth, not about Salida developers. The Salida Initiative provides that developers could be paid for up-front planning costs from development fees in that area, not from tax dollars.

Measure L is about County residents deciding what policies should control future growth in the County. Measure L requires a citizen committee to develop those policies that represent diverse stakeholder interests including residents, agriculture, business/manufacturing, environmental, development and community based organizations. County residents get to vote whether the new General Plan does what they want. If not, the General Plan must be revised to reflect the voters' intent, and the voters again get to decide if the County got it right.

Vote YES on L if you want a broad-based citizen group to revise the County General Plan to permanently build protections for farmland, and if you want County residents to participate in and decide how Stanislaus County grows.

Vote YES on L.

s/ Kevin Chiesa President, Stanislaus County Farm Bureau

The People of the County of Stanislaus do ordain as follows:

Section 1. Title and Intent. This Initiative measure (this "Initiative") shall be known as the "Stanislaus County Responsible Planning and Growth Control Initiative."

Section 2. Intent. This Initiative is an alternative to the Thirty Year Land Use Restriction Initiative ("Measure E"), which has qualified for the ballot at the February 5, 2008 election. Under Measure E, certain amendments to the existing General Plan and specified land use approvals must be submitted to the voters on a case by case basis for approval prior to becoming effective. A more comprehensive and fundamental method is necessary to allow citizen involvement in the planning process through the establishment of a broad-based commission of Stanislaus County residents to recommend a new General Plan, guided by the principles contained in this Initiative. The recommended General Plan would be submitted to the voters for their approval.

Section 3. Findings. A. In order to promote conservation of agricultural lands and orderly growth in the unincorporated areas of the County, the new General Plan should include the following principles:

(1) It is essential to have broad public participation in creating and approving Stanislaus County's land use blueprint for its future. This Initiative establishes a process for citizens to participate in the development of a new General Plan that would be submitted to voters countywide for their approval. The drafters of this new General Plan will be a broad-based coalition of citizens that represent a variety of stakeholder interests countywide.

(2) Maintaining Stanislaus County's agricultural heritage and the quality of life enjoyed by County residents depends on the protection and conservation of agricultural and open space lands. The protection of such lands aids the continued viability of agriculture and defines urban/rural boundaries.

(3) The protection of agricultural lands in Stanislaus County is of critical importance to present and future residents. Agriculture has been and remains a major contributor to the local and regional economy. Agriculture creates direct and indirect employment for many people and provides valuable food crops distributed worldwide.

(4) Proper planning must occur for Stanislaus County's projected growth. New growth must be placed in locations that discourage urban sprawl, minimize impacts to agriculture and encourage economic development. New growth must be supported by adequate in-place infrastructure to prevent degradation of the quality of life of existing residents. Most importantly, new growth must be required to pay its own way so that existing residents are not left to bear the burden of the financial cost of providing essential services to new residents.

B. Measure E's stated intent is to "maintain farmland," but Measure E has no such provisions. The only way to guarantee farmland preservation is to require it. By contrast, this Initiative, promotes the development of mitigation measures to permanently protect farmland.

C. Another concern with Measure E, is its stated intent to provide for "direct citizen participation in land use decisions affecting County policies." A likely result of this policy would be to encourage uncoordinated piecemeal, developer-driven planning initiatives. This form of planning does not address regional consideration of and imposition of mitigation measures for traffi c, education and public safety issues that our communities need.

D. Measure E requires voters to approve every subdivision of 10 or more lots. By contrast, this Initiative proposes that a new General Plan be drafted by a broad-based coalition of citizens that represent a variety of stakeholder interests countywide. The new General Plan would be guided by the principles contained in this Initiative and would be submitted to the voters countywide for their approval. Instead of the entire electorate potentially voting on every subdivision of 10 or more lots throughout the County, the voters would give direction on the broader question of where, how and to what degree the County should grow.

E. This Initiative places a limitation on General Plan amendments which would redesignate land from an agricultural or open space use to a residential use until a new General Plan is adopted, unless required by state law. The existing General Plan is legally suffi cient and adequate to allow orderly development of the County and to assure that no property owner is denied economic use of their property for the two-year period during the development of the new General Plan. This provision is included to ensure that uses are not approved that would be in conflict with or otherwise inconsistent with the intent of the contemplated new General Plan.

F. This Initiative establishes a process and guiding principles to amend the General Plan. It is not intended to be an amendment of the County's existing General Plan.

Section 4. Establishment of General Plan Review Commission.

A. Within sixty (60) days following the effective date of this Initiative ordinance, the Board of Supervisors shall appoint a 15-member commission. The membership of this commission shall be a broad-based coalition of citizens from throughout the County representing diverse stakeholder interests including, but not limited to, residents, agriculture, business/manufacturing, environmental, development and community based organizations.

B. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt procedures for appointing and replacing members on the General Plan Review Commission, and shall adopt rules for conduct of Commission proceedings.

Section 5. Task of Commission.

A. The General Plan Review Commission, appointed by the Board of Supervisors under Section 4 above, shall undertake such studies and work as may be necessary to draft a new General Plan. In creating a new General Plan, a reasonable range of alternatives will be considered as set forth in Section 6. The Commission shall take into consideration the principles set forth in Section 3. The work of the Commission shall be pursued with diligence so that the General Plan drafted by the Commission may be submitted to the voters prior to expiration of the two-year period established under Section 8 of this ordinance. The work of the Commission shall conclude upon adoption of the new General Plan.

B. The policies contained in this section shall be considered by the General Plan Review Commission in preparation of a new General Plan,in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and State Planning Law.

(1) Farmland Preservation Policies The General Plan Review Commission shall consider new General Plan Agricultural Element standards, policies and implementation measures designed to protect the economic viability of agricultural land. The Commission shall consider a policy that would require new development to permanently protect farmland of equivalent quality elsewhere in Stanislaus County through the establishment of permanent conservation easement(s) at a 1:1 ratio. The Commission shall recommend guidelines that address both the purchase of, and payment of fees for the purchase of farmland conservation easements.

(2) Growth Management Policies
(a) The Commission shall consider and, if appropriate, recommend establishment of a residential development allocation program which sets an annual limit on the number of single-family residential units which may be constructed in the unincorporated portions of the County in any given year. The Commission should consider exemptions to this annual limit for the following types of uses:

1. Income-restricted housing needed to meet quantifi ed objectives for very low and low income housing, along

2. Dwelling units designed for one or more Special Needs Groups (i.e., disabled, income-restricted senior housing), as needed to meet quantifi ed objectives for housing of special needs groups.

3. Dwelling units within development projects having vested rights prior to the effective date of this Initiative through a valid (unexpired) development agreement or vesting map.

4. Single dwelling unit by or for the owner of the lot of record on which the dwelling unit is to be constructed.

5. Second dwelling unit on a lot of record consistent with the current zone classifi cation.

(b) The Commission shall consider whether or not growth should be directed to areas of poorer quality or less productive armland, such as areas with poorer soils in the foothill regions of the County.

(c) The Commission shall consider policies that would encourage cities to adopt community boundaries and buffers to evelop community identities.

(d) The Commission shall ensure that the Housing Element of the new General Plan conforms to state housing requirements and ensures its capacity to accommodate a variety of housing types throughout the County as required by the State Planning Act.

(3) Fiscal, Service and Infrastructure Policies The Commission shall consider fi scal policies that would require projects to pay their own way, meaning that the project will generate adequate revenues to cover the service needs of the project. These policies should include a requirement that all projects prepare a fiscal analysis demonstrating that the project completely covers the cost of providing infrastructure and ongoing services. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board of Supervisors may make fi ndings of necessity that exceptions be made to the foregoing policies to allow the County to meet its fair share of affordable housing and other state housing requirements.

C. No violation of Law by this Section

(1) Nothing contained in this Section shall constitute an amendment of the existing General Plan. Upon approval of this Initiative by the voters, the County shall take all necessary and appropriate steps to implement the procedures set forth in this Initiative consistent with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act and in conformance with State Planning Law.

(2) Nothing in this Section shall be construed or interpreted in such a manner as to operate to deprive any landowner of substantially all of the market value of his/her property or otherwise constitute an unconstitutional taking without compensation. If application of any of the provisions of this chapter to any specific project or landowner would create an unconstitutional taking, the Board of Supervisors may take such other actions to the extent necessary to avoid what otherwise might be construed to be a taking, and any actions shall be designed to carry out the goals and provisions of this Section to the maximum extent feasible.

Section 6. Voter Approval.

A. The General Plan Review Commission shall forward a preferred alternative for the new General Plan, along with a reasonable range of alternatives, to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors prior to conducting the environmental review of the Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, section 21000 et seq.). Upon completion of the environmental review for the new General Plan, the Board of Supervisors shall select its preferred alternative from the General Plan Review Commission's range of alternatives. The Board of Supervisors shall submit its preferred alternative to the voters at either a special or regular election.

B. The new General Plan will become effective upon approval by the voters. If the voters reject the neGeneral Plan, the Board of Supervisors shall submit a revised plan to the voters for their subsequent consideration. If the voters reject the revised plan, the Board of Supervisors should consider the reasons for rejection, and given the legal requirement to update the General Plan, is authorized to proceed with the adoption of a further revised General Plan in accordance with applicable law and consistent with the principles of this Initiative.

Section 7. Subsequent Amendment of General Plan.

The General Plan adopted pursuant to Section 6 may only be amended or updated by a 4/5 vote of the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors shall not vote until the Planning Commission has made a recommendation on the amendment and the Board of Supervisors has heard the matter at two separate Board of Supervisors meetings at least 14 days apart, with the vote being taken at aevening meeting. Notice of these meetings shall be published in accordance with applicable State law.

Section 8. Limitation of General Plan Amendments.

For a period of two years from the effective date of this ordinance the General Plan of the County of Stanislaus may not be amended in a manner which would redesignate land from an agricultural or open space use to a residential use without voter approval. If the General Plan has not been adopted by the voters within the initial two-year period, the Board of Supervisors shall, in a manner consistent with State law and upon making all required findings, adopt a moratorium on any General Plan amendments that would change the permitted use of land designated for agricultural or open space use to residential use. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the County may process and take action, including approval or denial, of any proposed amendments resulting from completed applications that are on file with the County prior to the effective date of this Initiative, or which are required to allow the County to meet its fair share of affordable housing and other state housing requirements.

Section 9. Severability.

If any portion of this Initiative ordinance is declared invalid by a court of proper jurisdiction, the remaining portions shall remain valid and enforceable. In the event the Board of Supervisors can cure any such defi ciency in a manner consistent with the intent of this ordinance, the Board of Supervisors shall take whatever action may be necessary to cure the defect in compliance with applicable State law relating to the adoption and amendment of general plans.

Section 10. Effective Date.

Pursuant to subdivision (b) of Elections Code section 9141, this Initiative ordinance shall become effective 30 days from and after the date of final passage.

Section 11. Conflicting Measures.

A. There is a clear conflict between this Initiative and Measure E. If both measures are approved on February 5, 2008, the measure receiving the greater number of affirmative votes shall supersede the other measure. No provision of the superseded measure shall be implemented or enforced.

B. In the event that the voters approve any initiative or referendum other than Measure E related to the County's general plan contemporaneously with the approval of this ordinance, the measure receiving the greater number of affirmative votes shall supersede the other measure(s). No provision of the superseded measure(s) shall be implemented or enforced.

Section 12. Duration. The provisions of this Initiative shall remain in effect until 30 years after its effective date.