Home › Opinion › Opinion
Howry: Forming a new city by splitting Oxnard a no go
Tale of one metropolis
It's hard not to be skeptical about the proposal to split Oxnard and create a new city in the county. The new city would be called Channel Islands Beach and, as originally proposed, be made up of all of Oxnard's ritziest neighborhoods, primarily those along the beaches. Not surprisingly, that original proposal met with little enthusiasm, characterized by some as a blatant attempt by rich folks to separate themselves from the rest of the "unwashed."
Jonathan Ziv, a Channel Islands Beach Community Services District board member who is championing the proposal, recognized the potential public-relations nightmare of the original proposal and quickly revised it to make it more palatable. Ziv offered the revision after speaking with local members of the League of United Latin American Citizens. Apparently enlightened by this discussion and seeing the merit of including Latino neighborhoods in the new city, Ziv announced, "So I decided to include them."
Despite the magnanimity of Ziv's offer to include Latino neighborhoods, LULAC members weren't convinced and haven't taken a position on the proposal. Those who have, however, are convinced the proposal is wholly without merit and say it would be devastating to the city.
Oxnard City Manager Ed Sotelo not only raised questions about Ziv's motive for including Latino neighborhoods, but also expressed grave concerns about how the new city would pay for police, fire and other necessary government services. That was an especially revealing point in light of the fact that Ziv's proposal lops off the city's major tax-generating retail district along the 101 corridor. Things being what they are in California, trying to start a new city based almost exclusively on property taxes is risky at best and certainly foolhardy.
Ziv and his supporters say the new city would give residents more control over traffic, development, police and fire services, and all of this without raising taxes. To support this contention, Ziv claimed that he had heard from a number of consultants who believe the new city would be financially viable on its face. Unfortunately, he declined to name any of these consultants, leaving it up to guesswork and faith about their qualifications and credibility.
No matter how Ziv and the other supporters of this proposal try to dress up this dog, it smacks of arrogance and elitism. Most likely, it has little chance of going anywhere, even with the heavy financial backing of Ziv and his friends. What it does do, though, is perpetuate the perception of Oxnard as the county's homely stepsister. What it implies is that by coming up with a more appealing new name and by axing the poorer and undesirable neighborhoods that, voila, a lovely Cinderella will emerge.
There is another presence ready to emerge from Oxnard, but it is hardly a Cinderella. A more apt analogy would be from Clark Kent to Superman. Oxnard is on the verge of bursting forth as the powerhouse of Ventura County.
While the other nine cities in the county have severely restricted their growth potential, Oxnard has exploded in development and population growth, economic expansion and, most importantly, a dynamic vision of potential and possibility. It is a city on the move, and while no one is certain where it will move to, it is a certainty that it will be the force to reckon with in the future of Ventura County.
It has long been great sport in the county to make fun of Oxnard. There's no getting around it, the name is not pretty. The city has its problems, some caused by its sheer size, some by its location and some by the wealth of its diversity. But these are the problems not of a stagnant community, but one full of growth, vitality, energy and progress.
Those who believe that growth is bad will continue to look down their noses at Oxnard. As the city continues to grow, they will point to all the associated growing pains, including crime and broad socioeconomic divisions, and feel smug about their circumstances. And they will continue to feel that way right up until the day they realize that Oxnard has become the engine that powers Ventura County.
The vision of a new city in Ventura County is not wrong; however, it is not something that will be created from an existing city. It will be the evolution of a city, one that has shed its dowdy image, cast aside its feelings of inferiority and come into its own. And when it does, the name Oxnard will not sound funny or strange.
— Joe R. Howry is editor of The Star. He can be reached by phone at 437-0200 or by e-mail at jhowry@VenturaCountyStar.com.




Posted by chair on September 23, 2007 at 1:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nothing wrong with growth so long as there's infrastructure for the burgeoning population. Such as water. Such as streets and sewers. And such as planning. What Oxnard has now is a helter-skelter developer-driven mish-mash of expensive but junky houses. This is accompanied by equally sloppy strip malls and booze outlets. No one is planning long-term. No one is answering the hard questions today deferring, presumably, to federal largesse when the Big One hits. The desert that Oxnard has bloomed dies of inattention to details. Howry has it wrong! He's thinking of the Other Coast where real planning now prevails. They learned the hard way. Must we?
Posted by Adrienne on September 23, 2007 at 9:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now we’re talking, let’s take this city seriously. It is apparent growth is eminent. A city planner needs to be engaged to make this area a serious metropolis. If it’s going to be called Channel Islands Beach, Oxnard or any other name, it should be planned out seriously. Re-examine the city plan at the same time the name Channel Islands Beach is being deliberated. All of Oxnard would do well with a good plan by a city designer, and a name change.
Posted by lexus on November 17, 2007 at 3:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just re-name Oxnard "Channel islands Beach?'
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.