A noted economic forecaster, addressing the Thousand Oaks City Council on Tuesday night, took the pro-Measure B campaign to task for using his work to bolster their arguments in support of the controversial initiative.

Bill Watkins, director of UC Santa Barbara's Economic Forecast Project, said the Yes on B campaign took his comments out of context regarding how passage of the measure would result in increased home values and ignored downsides such as slowed job growth and fiscal and economic impacts "that will compound over time," he said.

"That's only one point of it, and it's being taken out of context," Watkins said during the public comment portion of the council meeting.

"I understand politics and academics have slightly different ethical standards, but in my opinion it is a fraud to the people to declare that our report says only house prices will go up. I consider it a fraud against myself and my co-authors to be taken out of context for political purpose."

The home-value statistic has been used in print advertisements for the pro-B campaign and on its Web site, which links to two pages of Watkins' analysis.

Harvey Englander of Englander & Associates, a consulting firm heading the Yes on B campaign, said in a telephone interview Tuesday evening that nothing was taken out of context.

"We did not change one word," Englander said. "It talked about a lot of things in relation to Measure B. It also said specifically that home values would go up with Measure B."

Watkins' analysis found that home values would increase 8.1 percent over the next four years because very few new homes would be built in the city if the initiative passes on June 3. He also found the initiative's passage would lead to a decline in per-capita funding for city services, while the cost of such services would increase.

The findings were included in a presentation Watkins made to the council in March as part of an effort to develop a financial strategic plan for the city. Other presentations have focused on demographics, sales tax revenue and capital infrastructure needs.

Watkins worked with Charles Maxey, dean of California Lutheran University's School of Business, on the forecast, which examined five scenarios, including a national recession, a state recession, the passage of Measure B, a doomsday scenario involving the collapse of Amgen, and a baseline scenario.

If approved, Measure B would change the way large development projects are considered. Projects of certain sizes would have to be approved by both the council and voters if the projects are judged to add significant traffic congestion to any street or intersection, without considering street improvements that are provided by the developer or the city.

The home-value statistic was first used as a reason to approve Measure B in a letter to the editor by initiative supporter Holly LaRue, who described Watkins' forecast as "doom-and-gloom" and asked if anyone noticed the initiative would maximize house values.

In a response letter, Watkins and Maxey wrote, "We do not take a position on the measure; we do wonder if the citizens of Thousand Oaks really want to vote in' a recession."

At the council meeting Tuesday, LaRue was among a handful of speakers who advocated for their positions on the ballot measure.

"Measure B is a simple straightforward measure," LaRue said. "Why are the opponents so fearful?"

Mark Jessee, a leader of the Thousand Oaks-Westlake Village Regional Chamber of Commerce, said the case against Measure B is basic economics.

"Measure B is anti-business," he said. "And anti-competition and a prosperity killer."