Ultimately, Anderson’s bid failed at the July 1 council meeting when Vice Mayor Laura Flores Espinosa and Councilman John Procter approved his request, but Councilman Rick Cook and Mayor Ray Luna opposed it.Scott said that although he is “disappointed that the voters of Santa Paula have been deprived of an opportunity to vote on growth that was short-term and sensible, we’ll provide them with an additional opportunity to vote on the issue on March 4th,” the date of the general primary election.Anderson noted the overwhelming support he received over plans to build up to 80 homes at the corner of Peck and Foothill roads and said he is confident voters will approve the initiative in March.“We’ll just do it again; I consider it more of a calendar setback,” that he won’t make the November ballot, Anderson noted. “After all, the March election is just four months after November’s, so we’ll just wait and do it again. I know we won’t have any trouble collecting signatures and getting on the March ballot. . .and Santa Paula voters will approve it.”
Anderson will place 32.5-acre parcel on March ballot
July 19, 2002
Santa Paula City Council
After a split City Council vote doomed the effort of a local developer to place his initiative on the ballot, Scott Anderson is again going to the voters to approve moving the city’s CURB, albeit after the November election.
By Peggy KellySanta Paula TimesAfter a split City Council vote doomed the effort of a local developer to place his initiative on the ballot, Scott Anderson is again going to the voters to approve moving the city’s CURB, albeit after the November election.Anderson of Del Financial, owner-developer of the parcel located at the corner of Foothill and Peck roads, has filed the necessary paperwork with the city to place his initiative on the March 4, 2003 ballot.Anderson’s initiative was initially disqualified due to an omission in the published legal notice. He asked that the City Council put it on the ballot but attorneys for the Pinnacle Group of Arizona, the proposed developer of Adams Canyon, which has its own CURB initiative, challenged it. Pinnacle’s attorneys’ claimed that Anderson’s property would have to undergo a full Environmental Impact Report due to council placement. Anderson countered that information from the State Clearinghouse and the city’s own General Plan consultant - Rincon - showed that an addendum would be adequate for the time being, a stance backed by his attorneys. Anderson also offered to indemnify the council against any costs resulting from Pinnacle filling a lawsuit.
