10 Council Candidates Spar in Thousand Oaks Forum

THOUSAND OAKS —  Ten candidates for the City Council spelled out their positions on growth, public safety and political in-fighting at a forum Thursday night.

Hoping to woo voters, the challengers sparred about a controversial road extension project while the incumbents touted their successes promoting public safety and keeping the libraries open seven days a week.

And this being Thousand Oaks, they also took a few swipes at one another over the incivility that permeates city politics.

“Council members should not be picking petty fights or carrying the baggage of imagined hurts,” candidate Chris Buckett said at this election season’s first forum, which drew about 100 people. “I for one am tired of the Tuesday night council fights.”

Candidate Marshall Dixon sounded a similar theme.

“I remind you, we are all supposed to be the beneficiaries, not the victims” of the City Council, he said. “Still, Thousand Oaks with all its warts--and there are some--is still the best-lookin’ kid on the block.”

Thirteen people are vying for three seats on the Thousand Oaks City Council. With only two of three incumbents seeking reelection, at least one newcomer is guaranteed a spot on the often rancorous five-member panel.

The Nov. 3 election has the potential to dramatically reshape Thousand Oaks city politics, where two entrenched council blocs are often at loggerheads with each other. Depending on who is elected, another bitter 3-2 split could emerge--the minority council members could seize political control or the majority council could solidify its power base.

In all, 10 of the candidates attended Thursday night’s forum at the Hyatt Westlake Plaza hotel hosted by the Dos Vientos Amigos. Some of the candidates who skipped the forum cited their opposition to the host group, a developer-funded booster organization for a massive Newbury Park housing project.

In attendance were citizen activist and volunteer Buckett, teacher and licensed lawyer Laura Lee Custodio, regional marketing manager Dan Del Campo, retired business manager Dixon, Councilman and Fire Capt. Andy Fox, university administrator Dennis C. Gillette, Councilwoman Judy Lazar, businessman and retired Air Force Col. Wayne A. Possehl, swimming pool designer Nick E. Quidwai and systems and civil engineer David Seagal.

Most questions posed to the candidates revolved around growth and development--perennial Thousand Oaks elections issues.

Members of the so-called “Clean Sweep” slate--endorsed by minority council members Linda Parks and Elois Zeanah--argued that growth was among the top issues facing votes.

“It doesn’t matter what I think” about development, slate member Possehl said. “It matters what the citizens of Thousand Oaks think. The citizens think we’re over-developed.”

Incumbents Fox and Lazar said the city’s General Plan; Measure E, which prevents increased zoning without a vote of the public, and the 14,000 acres of open space ringing the city all curb over-development.

“We’re flogging a dead horse here--that issue is long gone and taken care of,” Lazar said. “We’re almost built out. Ninety-five percent of residential development has been built or approved already.”

Gillette, a park district director, agreed. “We’re not going to bump into Camarillo. We’re not going to bump into Moorpark. And the topography keeps us from getting any closer to Simi Valley.”

The candidates also tussled over the grade of an extension of Borchard Road, which was approved two years ago at 12% and is now up for reconsideration after a public outcry.

The incumbents, who had initially voted for the 12% grade, now acknowledge the slope is too steep and said they were working to remedy the situation.

The concerns over the road voiced two years ago involved the environmental impacts of the road, Fox said.

“Now we realize the road is too steep,” he said. “That’s why I proposed the stop-work order [on the road’s grading] so we can reevaluate. We’re going to fix whatever problems may exist.”

The opponents hammered the original decision as one that favored a developer over the safety of children and families living nearby.

“I’m a lifelong skier,” Del Campo quipped. “When I heard they were going to put a 12% grade on Borchard Road, I was hoping they’d install a [ski] lift and pray for snow. . . . It’s unsafe. we have to have 5% at all costs.”

The candidates who skipped the forum were Planning Commissioner and paint store manager Dave Anderson, private security manager Nigel “Phil” Greaves and system scientist Richard Messina. At the gathering, audience members quizzed the candidates by submitting questions on cards to a moderator who also posed queries of his own.

Anderson said he declined the invitation because he expected it to be a tightly orchestrated affair before a hand-picked audience.

While Anderson was opposed to the density of the Dos Vientos project when it was approved, he said he now believes the builders have the right to move forward with the 2,300-home project, so long as negative traffic, noise and safety effects are addressed.

“I believe I can do far better for my campaign on the front porches of my civic neighbors’ homes tonight,” Anderson said before the forum. “I’d rather shake hands and kiss babies than be at something so choreographed it will either be mundane or it will be a situation were people applaud when they’re told to applaud and boo and hiss when they’re told to boo and hiss.”

Contrasted with most City Council meetings, however, audience outcries were kept to a minimum.