|
|
|
FREMONT - Measure T, a controversial Fremont ballot proposition that would strictly limit development in the hills above the city, appeared headed for victory Tuesday night. With nearly all precincts reporting, the measure was ahead by 15 points, a margin it held from early in the evening. Updated Nov. 6, 1:12 am
For Susan Gearhart, the likelihood of victory could not have been sweeter.
Since the beginning of the year Gearhart's secluded home in the Fremont hills has been headquarters for a whirlwind campaign to promote Measure T, a local ballot proposition that would strictly limit development on a 35,000 acre expanse overlooking the South Bay.
The Hill Area Initiative, as it is known, will apply tough new land use restrictions to both existing city areas as well as to any land Fremont might annex in the future, making expansion or development beyond the city's current boundaries almost impossible.
"We have nine phone lines exclusively to answer people's questions on the measure," said Gearhart, "and a big group of volunteers, all concerned citizens."
The battle over Measure T had split the city council and set off the modern day equivalent of a range war between wealthy hill dwellers who want to maintain open space and farmers and ranchers who own thousands of acres on the eastern side of the hill.
The city is littered with Yes On T and No on T posters and placards, and both sides in the campaign have spent considerable sums to get their messages to voters. As of the end of October, No raised $44,000 and Yes raised $75,000, of which $45,000 is a loan from Gearhart and her husband.
Measure T's restrictions will lay down rules on the number of homes per acre requiring all annexed land remain at one home per 100 acres. Hillside properties within city limits would be zoned at one home per 20 acres. It would also regularize the size of buildings on a lot and the types of uses of the land. For example no vineyards, Christmas tree farms or medium to large pig farms.
But it will also, in narrow circumstances, give the city council the power to put its own initiative on the ballot and to liberally interpret parts of the hillside initiative, such as what constitutes a medium-size pig farm.
Two city council seats were also at stake in Fremont, and the one held by Councilman Bob Wasserman appeared likely to remain in his hands. Wasserman has opposed development in the hills. With 90 percent of precincts reporting the second seat is still a toss up between Dominic Dutra and Henry Yin. A victory for Yin could tilt the council in favor of hill development.
Fremont has had development restrictions in place for more than two decades, but those limits do not apply to lands added to the city after 1981. Under current law, the city council can make development decisions for the newer areas on a case by case basis.
So last year, when Summer Hill Homes of Palo Alto sought permission to build 480 new houses on 1,400 acres of the Vargas Plateau, Gearhart and some of her neighbors discovered for the first time that the 1981 law might not keep the developers away.
"We met up in a hurry in November. A lot of research has been done regarding the use of land, and we used that research to form our initiativ," she said. Calling themselves Friends of the Ridgelands, Gearhart and her husband hired a campaign consultant, drafted the initiative and began collecting signatures to place it on the ballot. According to Gearhart they collected 13,000 signatures in seven weeks between January and February.
Measure T has endorsements from a wide array of civic leaders and community groups, including the local League of Women Voters, Ohlone Audubon Society, Tri-City Ecology Center, Gus Morrison, Mayor of Fremont and Guy Emanuele, President of the Fremont Unified School District.
Opponents of Measure T said it is shortsighted. They claimed that closing the hills to development would force the city to allow more high-rise apartments and high-density housing. They also argued that the initiative is an infringement of the property rights of individuals.
"The proponents of the initiative claim to be very strict environmentalists, and have little or no regard for property rights," said Jack Parry who is one of the contributors to the campaign against the initiative.
Much of the $44,000 that the No on T campaign has spent on its campaign has come from property owners in the hills who have an interest in developing their land.
According to Jack Parry of the Parry Family Trust, which controls one-third of a ranch in the hills, donated $3,800 to the No on T campaign, and ranchers Don and Robert Vieux donated $3,500. Councilman Bill Pease chipped in $500. The biggest single contribution was $7,000 from the Alameda County Legal Fund, an association of ranchers, farmers and cattlemen.
Friends of the Ridgelands has raised a total of $75,000 to $80,000 in loans and donations Gearhart said. James and Susan Gearhart put up $45,000 of it.
"They don't want neighbors," said Parry. "I cannot understand how an organization that feels so strongly needs to put in $50,000 of their own funds and do not have enough volunteers -- in this instance they spent $28,000 on signature gatherers."
Gearhart said her campaign has strong grassroots support.
"Yes, we had one campaign consultant. I don't know how these things are done. I'm a nurse. I did pay for guidance on how to do it, but the signatories were all volunteers," she said. "We loaned $45,000 initially because in the beginning when it is not on the ballot no one will contribute. We hope to get it back by the end of the campaign."
In other Fremont races, Measure S to increase salaries of the city council members and mayor seems to be heading toward a big defeat and Measure R, a $51 million Fire Safety Bond to improve fire safety and emergency response in Fremont, is leading by a wide margin.