Save Carmel Valley . org -  Voters don’t want Flanders Mansion or Town of C.V.



Click Analysis

Voters don’t want Flanders Mansion or Town of C.V.

Carmel Pine Cone – Nov. 6, 2009




■ Incorporation advocates not conceding
By CHRIS COUNTS

CARMEL VALLEY voters rejected the idea of turning
their scenic valley into an incorporated city by a 52-to-48
percent margin, but incorporation proponents are holding out
hope that a few remaining provisional ballots could reverse
the outcome of Tuesday’s election.

“The results of the Measure G vote are still too close to
call,” insisted town council candidate Glenn Robinson. “So
far, 4,164 votes have been tallied, with the ‘no’ side holding
a slim lead.”

According to the Monterey County elections department
1,986 ballots were cast in favor of creating a town, and 2,178
votes were counted opposing it — a 192-vote, or 4.6-percent,
difference.

But according to proponents, there are still about 1,400
ballots left to count. “We’re going to wait until every ballot
is counted,” Robinson said.

Monterey County’s registrar of voters, Linda Tulett, said
the number of outstanding ballots is probably much smaller.
Her office is hoping to complete its tally of the Measure G
election by Nov. 13. She said her staff not only needs to count
each remaining ballot, but verify the validity of each voter as
well, which is a time-consuming process.

“We have about 8,500 ballots throughout the county left to
count,” explained Tulett, who expressed skepticism that
1,400 ballots from Carmel Valley remained uncounted.

“Carmel Valley is showing a 53 percent turnout of voters. If
there are 1,400 ballots left to count in Carmel Valley, that
presumes there was a 71 percent turnout. That’s quite a jump
from 53 percent.”

The remaining ballots include provisional ballots, mail-in
ballots, ballots that were dropped off at polling places and
ballots that were damaged.

While the race for Measure G isn’t technically over, incorporation
opponents celebrated as if it was. “We expected to
win by a larger margin,” said Bob Sinotte, an outspoken
opponent. “But we’re happy our side won.”

Is anybody ready for round two?

If incorporation backers want to try again, they’ll probably
have to wait two years, according to Kate McKenna,
executive officer for the Local Agency Formation
Commission. An exception could be made if the waiting period
is deemed “detrimental to the public interest,” she said.

Proponents have repeatedly said they have no intention of
bringing back the incorporation proposal in two years — or
even longer.

“We’re going to have one shot,” town council candidate
Larry Bacon insisted at a debate before the vote. “It took us
a quarter of a million dollars to get here.”

Robinson agreed. “It will be decades before we get a
chance to do this again,” he added.

Sinotte, though, believes the return of another incorporation
drive is imminent. For evidence, he points to the incorporation
of Goleta in 2002. Previous attempts to incorporate
the Santa Barbara County community failed at the ballot box
in 1978 and 1990. “They’re going to bring incorporation
back every two years,” Sinotte predicted.

What might have been....

With the defeat of Measure G, the election for proposed
Carmel Valley’s town council was purely symbolic. While
voters nixed incorporation, it was clear they favored a town
council that at least supported the idea. Former 5th District
Supervisor Karin Strasser Kauffman came in first, with
2,081 votes, followed by Robinson (1,963 votes) and pro-
Incorporation candidates Larry Bacon (1,793 votes), Amy
Anderson (1,766 votes) and Priscilla Walton (1,608 votes).
Scott Dick led incorporation opponents with 1,121 votes, followed
by Jacob Odello with 1,021 votes.

The rural debate continues

The vote leaves the future of development in the hands of
the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. But Sinotte said
he would propose the creation of a land trust to buy property
in Carmel Valley to put it off limits to development.

Sinotte proposes calling the new group the Carmel River
Valley Property Owners Association. “Our goal would be the
same as that of the Big Sur Land Trust,” Sinotte explained.
“We would buy up tracts of land and preserve them.”

Instead of funding political campaigns, Sinotte suggested
local residents fund the purchase of open space. “Let’s not
waste money on more elections.”



Last Updated: Nov 06, 09

Most Recent

Final Results Nov. 13, 2009 --Measure G Defeated by 52.52% to 47.48%

Yard Signs and/or Bumper-stickersGet Them While They’re Fresh!FREE! Call Lawrence at 831-238-5058 ...

Poll: Many Oppose C.V. Incorporation

SURVEY CARDS mailed to residents at the mouth of Carmel Valley have a resounding “no...

Irvine to be Flooded with Afforable Housing?

Erika Chavez, Staff WriterOrange County RegisterDespite lawsuits and appeals, the City of Irvine is ...

Housing Mandates in California

By Lawrence SamuelsIn 2002, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) determined the ...