The following article first appeared in the December 31, 1969 edition of “The Ojai Valley News” on the front page. It is reprinted here with their permission.
Review of the Sixties — Part 4
Freeway fighters win scenic highway battle
by Gary Hachadourian
(This is another in a series of articles reviewing the Sixties in the Ojai Valley.)
Early in the Decade the state legislature passed the Scenic Highway Act and then asked the counties which roads they wanted designated as “scenic highways.” Ventura county supervisors fingered Highway 150 from Santa Barbara to Santa Paula — through the Ojai valley — and that’s when the Battle of the Scenic Highway originated.
In the beginning, there was no opposition. In fact, if you had asked the average resident how he felt about Highway 150 as a “scenic highway,” the reply would probably have been “just fine.” It wasn’t until the state decided to choose the route that the first shots were fired and the battle joined.
The word “freeway”
In the beginning “scenic highway” had meant to the public, in essence, “making the highway more scenic.” When the state came forward with varied routes, residents soon learned that the new Highway 150 would be built according to “freeway standards.” The word “freeway” had alarming connotations and the issue at once became emotional. Few people wanted another freeway through the valley.
Between Ojai and Upper Ojai, four routes were being considered, the state announced. Though public sentiment was anti-construction, citizens early came to favor a route through Lion Canyon to the south of the city, away from the valley floor.
The Division of Highways had previously ceased to consider that route; but in what was seen as a partial victory for opponents of the highway, the state announced that it would re-study Lion Canyon, a more “expensive” route.
In May of 1967, however, at what was to become a turning point in the history of the battle, the newly formed Committee to Preserve the Ojai determined that it would actively oppose any selection of routes. In August of that year, the East Ojai Valley Associates, which up until then had been urging strict standards in construction made the same decision.
Throughout the next year, the Division of Highways persistently urged the city and county to agree on a route of its own accord and plan to set aside a “corridor of beauty” along that route in order to ensure that the scenic highway would indeed be scenic.
Huge petition
The City Council, in September of 1968, resolved that the Lion Canyon route was most desirable, a decision that sparked the Committee to Preserve the Ojai to get thousands of names in opposition on a petition.
When the all-important public meeting between state engineers and the aroused public came in October of 1968, the Committee to Preserve the Ojai presented a map of the valley on which each landowner who opposed all construction had his property colored red. Color the valley red.
The issue was not decided, however, until late 1969. At the urging of the City Council and the Board of Supervisors, the state agreed to postpone route adoption “for an indefinite period” in order to consider, first, “new priorities in valley road construction.”
The force of public opinion had triumphed.
There was irony in this “victory.” Opponents had been fighting to keep the valley rural by opposing the road. But it was the effects of urbanization that had brought the new road work priorities into existence and cause the state to lay off the scenic highway.
Traffic volume in the valley had grown to the point where, because freeway construction was falling behind schedule, the interim widening of Highway 33 between Foster Park and Ojai took precedence over the construction of any new road. More people in more cars needed to get in and out of the valley.
And the traffic volume within the City of Ojai had doubled. In December of 1967, City Manager Jack Blalock said that the city’s number one problem was traffic congestion in the downtown area.
In order to ease congestion, the city felt, the state should approve and construct a loop of two one-way streets in the downtown area along its state Highway 150 route.
And the loop was intended to solve not only traffic problems.
For, throughout the decade, another type of outside pressure on the valley had worked to force change within it. And though, in this case, the force was indirect, it was nonetheless real.
Ojai’s business community, with some exceptions, was suffering. As the decade progressed, the situation became increasingly pronounced to the point where, in 1968, despite population growth, taxable sales were the same as they were in 1964, this despite the fact that prices had gone up.
Promoting this situation was, of course, the development of new, convenient and competitive shopping centers in nearby cities, most notably in Ventura.
Absentee owners
Promoting it, also, was the fact that many owners of floor space in Ojai’s historic and distinctive shopping area, the Arcade, were absentee owners. They showed no inclination to spend money needed to refurbish their properties, even to the extent of making them structurally sound. (In 1966, an engineer opined that the Arcade could collapse in a severe earthquake.)
And the forces pressing for action became compounded in the latter half of the decade when the then unincorporated area along Maricopa Road to the west of the city quite clearly was being considered as a target site by commercial developers.
Also, in the untouched Santa Ana Valley a few miles away, county planners in 1967 approved plans for a 512-acre residential and golf course development that would include a new shopping center.
The traffic loop of two one-way streets in the downtown area was crucial to a plan to turn the tide. Getting the state to approve and construct a loop became the city’s number one priority. Thus, the Battle of the Scenic Highway was an ironic “victory” for Ojai.
The outrage was only reactionary, a response to the continuing force of urbanization.
If Ojai truly was to determine its future, the valley would have to anticipate events; would have to search its soul in an effort to decide what it wanted; would have to take steps to ensure that no unmanageable situations could even arise.
It would have to plan carefully, and completely, and stand by that plan.
Feds doing council’s job
The following article first appeared in the Sunday, February 12, 1978 edition of the “OJAI VALLEY NEWS” on Page 4. It is reprinted here with their permission.
Feds doing council’s job
by
John E. Nelson, M.D.
___________________
Our
environment
___________________
“Clean Air — Or No Growth, City Told,” a recent OVN headline proclaimed.
Thanks for the choice. But we’ll take both.
Here’s the situation as it now stands. Because Ojai’s City Council and the county board of supervisors have proved themselves shamefully unwilling to halt rampant growth and air pollution in our valley, the big-brother federal bureaucracy is going to do it for us.
The means they’ll use is through our outmoded sewage treatment plant which has long been fouling the Ventura River in violation of federal health standards. If the plant is not upgraded soon, we could be fined $15,000 a day. In order to get the job done, a large federal grant must be approved.
BUT THE FEDS seem to be more concerned about the quality of our air than our own elected officials have been. They know that an upgraded sewer plant opens the gates to new development and overpopulation with inevitably increased air pollution.
Because we have failed to meet the standards set forth in the federal Clean Air Act, our valley has been designated as a “non-attainment area” — bureaucratic jargon which means that our air is unsafe to breathe during 98% of summer days. So the federal government is saying that it’s not about to give us money to make our air even more unhealthy.
Their hand so forced, the Ojai city council responded by postponing the final decision on the all-important general plan which will set the limits of future growth. They had hoped to push through their version of the plan before March 7 when the people will have a chance to elect a more environmentally aware council. This change again underscores the importance of this crucial election in determining the future of the entire valley.
MEANWHILE, the city planning commission and the county Air Pollution Control District are pointing their fingers at each other in a pointless dispute over where the air pollution comes from. APCD officials, who live outside the valley, say we make our own. Commissioners, who live inside the valley, say it blows in from elsewhere. Both sides seem to be clouding the issue and protecting their own interests.
The APCD, which is responsible for controlling air pollution on a countywide basis, has inexplicably been playing a now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t game with Petrochem’s nitrogen oxide emissions. One wonders about their motivations for so compromising the health of the citizenry it is enjoined to protect. Perhaps they are covering the incredible mistakes of the board of supervisors in allowing Petrochem and oil drilling to exist in the first place.
The city planning commission, which now faces a mandate to halt new sources of air pollution within the valley, prefers to believe that there are no polluting industries here (ignoring the oil-drilling industry), and that “all we have is traffic and homes” (as if traffic were not the single major source of smog).
The truth is that there is too much pollution coming from both inside and outside the valley. Each side in the dispute seems to be engineering a monumental cop-out designed to relieve themselves from responsibility in dealing with the problem. Such thinking hardly seems worthy of the great challenge created by our ever-mounting smog hazard.
The solution to this problem lies in a vigorous effort from both agencies not just to keep our air from getting worse, but to clean up the already unacceptable levels of disease-producing smog. This column calls upon the APCD to increase its monitoring of Petrochem and oil-drilling sites, and to publish weekly reports on its activities. The Ojai Planning Commission must likewise do their part by halting all population growth now. The recent public outcry which resulted in the denial of an ill-conceived tract development clearly indicates that this is the will of the people.
FORTUNATELY, the voters of the City of Ojai will on March 7 have an opportunity to seat a majority of environmentally committed councilpersons who will do more than wait for Washington to tell them how to preserve our valley. The candidates have been crystallizing their stands, and our choices are becoming clear. Look for an update on this crucial election in a future column.
“No action” critics challenged
The following article first appeared in the Sunday, February 19, 1978 edition of the “Ojai Valley News” on Page 16. It is reprinted here with their permission.
“No action” critics challenged
————————
Our
environment
———————–
by
John E. Nelson, M.D.
This columnist is pleased to note that the Our Environment column has again stimulated a community dialogue on the crucial issue of overdevelopment in our valley.
This time the dialogue has taken the form of letters-to-the-editor from two city councilpersons who chose to speak in rebuttal of last week’s column. That column chided the council for it’s lack of activism which led to the federal government’s seizing the initiative in demanding a halt to increasing air pollution which inevitably follows overdevelopment.
Surprisingly, the author of the letter which most vigorously defended the present council’s inadequate posturings has been its most active force in the struggle to keep The Ojai’s environment both rural and healthy. He has often waged solitary battles against urbanization of Ojai’s streets and the council’s penchant for granting untimely exemptions to the building moratorium. On numerous environmental votes he has found himself to be in a minority of one.
For this reason it is difficult to understand his defense of a council which has been anything but “activist” in pursuit of environmental quality. Other towns with far less to preserve than ours have elected councils who themselves have taken the initiative in improving their environment rather than simply slowing its destruction. They have brought their imaginations to the fore in initiating such measures as litter cleanups, firm population ceiling reinforced by downsizing, tree-planting projects, container laws, bicycle path construction and limitations on driving during smoggy days.
A SECOND LETTER quoted rather dubious statistics which seem to show that the City of Ojai has grown in population by only 400 persons since 1970. Yet during the past seven years there have been 381 single-family dwellings, 113 condominium units and 135 multiple family units built here for a total of 629 new dwellings. Although a few of these are still in construction, it does seem unreasonable to assume that there have been more dwellings constructed than new arrivals to occupy them.
Based on a conservative estimate of 2.5 persons per dwelling, a more realistic figure for this town’s population increase would be 1, 572 persons in the past seven years. Too many by any standards.
From the time Socrates debated his adversaries in the streets of Athens, an unfortunate technique of argument has contaminated political discourse. Later labeled “ad hominum” by the Romans, it is a method of attacking the person who makes a point rather than answering the point itself. Experts in debate consider it a desperation maneuver with little heuristic merit.
Sadly, ad hominum agruments seem to be infiltrating the exchange of legitimate views in our town. The crucial challenge of preserving a healthy and livable environment deserves better.
FOR INSTANCE, this columnist was criticized for not regularly attending city council meetings and thereby missing the opportunities to “get the true facts.” This criticism presupposes that such facts have been available during generally obfuscatory council meetings, a questionable assertion at best. Each of us must arrange our priorities according to our talents and available time, and the four to five hours per week spent on research and preparation of this column leaves little remaining time for attendance of lengthy meetings.
This column has been virtually the only medium to offer any criticism of the city council during the past year on any issue. Yet the community response which has been generated clearly indicates that these views represent those of the majority of environmentally concerned and oft-frustrated valley residents. To remain viable, the democratic process requires vigorous and regular criticism of the humanly imperfect persons who govern us.
The entire issue once more underscores the importance of the upcoming March 7 election in which Ojai voters will have an opportunity to seat a majority of environmental activists who will aggressively pursue the public health interests of this community. This column again calls upon all concerned to keep the ongoing debate high-toned and issue oriented.
Beautification Month
The following article was first published in the Winter 2018 (VOLUME 36 NUMBER 4) issue of the “Ojai Valley Guide” magazine that is published by the “Ojai Valley News”. With their permission, the article is reprinted here. It ran on pages 154 and 155 in the magazine.
LOOK BACK IN OJAI 1969
Beautification Month
By
Drew Mashburn
Contributed on behalf of the Ojai Valley Museum
In October 1969, the Ojai Chamber of Commerce spearheaded a “Beautification for Better Business Campaign.” I had graduated from Nordhoff High School only a few months before and must tell you, at the time, my business was chasing after beautiful women and cars. I could not have cared less about sprucing up things around the valley, except for a good wash and waxing of my 1961 Austin Healy “Bug Eye” Sprite to, hopefully, impress beautiful young ladies.
So, moving on, I was ignorant of this cleanup drive.
Read the rest of the article in the Ojai Magazine.
Police mull action to ‘clean up’ park
The following article first appeared in the Sunday, June 4, 1967 edition of the “Ojai Valley News” on the front page. It is reprinted here with their permission
Hippie set
Police mull action to ‘clean up’ park
Ojai police, nettled by a series of provocative acts attributed to members of the Hippie set, were mulling retaliatory action Friday.
Chief James D. Alcorn said his “phone has been ringing off the hook,” with calls from citizens who are plainly disturbed by what they claim are impudent reflections on recent narcotics violations.
Most recent incident was the posting of a sign near the arches fronting Civic Park, proclaiming “Things go better with Pot.” Pot is a slang word for marijuana.
Alcorn said private citizens have also complained about the posting of a routed redwood sign with the capital letters, O-V-D-A, which reportedly stand for “Ojai Valley Drug Addicts.”
He said some of the Hippies hold the sign on their laps as they sit on the wall fronting the park.
Civic Park is a private park, administered by Ojai Civic Association. Alcorn said trustees of the association have been exploring ways of combating the situation, but thus far have failed to find any answers.
In recent discussion of the problem by the Ojai City Council, City Attorney Duane Lyders warned the council that restrictive actions would raise questions of free speech and assembly – thorny issues of civil rights.
As a private park, however, authorities have indicated there might be ways of cleaning up the situation.
The Hippie set has used the front area of the park as a rallying point for some time,, according to Alcorn, but the situation apparently worsened earlier this year when Hippies from coastal cities staged the first of two “Love-ins.”
The first event came off without incident. Barefoot youths with flowers behind their ears strummed on guitars, ate picnic lunches and proclaimed “Love” to all who would listen. It was similar to events conducted quietly in Los Angeles, San Francisco and most recently in an eastern city.
The second “Love-in”, however, had slightly different overtones. Police arrested two visitors on charges of possessing marijuana. One was a girl from Glendale, the other a boy from Los Angeles.
Observers, however, noted that some of the visitors were not so young and some were estimated to be only juveniles who supported the bizarre costumes and deportment of Hippies years older.
Alcorn said the situation was a delicate one. “We have to be careful how we handle this thing,” he warned, “publicity is what most of these people want.”
He said the most his officers could do at present was to see that no laws are broken.