Bruce Smith is the manager of the general plan section of the Ventura County Planning Division in Ventura, California. The division is charged with overseeing “developing, recommending, and implementing land-use goals, policies, and programs” for the county.

What is the significance of the 2003 Ahmanson Ranch purchase, which protected nearly 3,000 acres in Ventura County from development?

This was a case of Prince Charming [the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy] literally coming and buying the land at the last minute. What would have happened if the state didn’t have the money and a willing seller? In all likelihood, the land would have been developed.

Do you think the Ahmanson Ranch saga might have played out differently if something like Proposition 90 had been in effect during the negotiations?

Washington Mutual [the landowner] would have been much more confident in its long-term desire to develop the property. A provision that says, “Any action by local government in California that diminishes the value of property entitles a citizen to compensation” means that no law will ever be written that would seem to reduce value in any way. Local government has a hard enough time surviving financially anyway.

Do you think most Californians understand the implications of Proposition 90?

No. It’s just simply not on people’s radar. Most people not involved in government really have no clue.

Give us a brief history of land-use regulation in your county.

The County of Ventura, like most counties in California, had plans for growth and development of its land, and not much appreciation for preservation of agricultural land or protection of natural resources prior to the 1970s and the environmental movement. Plans were based largely on when and where growth would occur, not if growth would occur. A policy document came forth that stated development should occur in cities, not in unincorporated areas such as Ventura County, which led to downzoning of much of Ventura County’s land. We didn’t say, “You can’t do anything with your land.” We guaranteed the right to a single-family home, agricultural uses, et cetera. The county did not take away all value, but certainly, from a purely economic standpoint, reduced land value for a number of properties in the county. If Proposition 90 were in effect at that time, none of the downzoning would have occurred because the county could not afford to pay property owners for reducing the land value.