Measure I was passed by Santa Paula voters in November 2000, banning development in Adams Canyon and in an area west of the city slated for commercial-industrial. Both those supporting and opposing Adams Canyon development carried on a lively campaign including heavy newspaper advertising and direct mailers sent to voters. Money poured into the coffers of opponents from realtors and developers while donations for Measure I came from slow-growth activists.SOAR established a city urban restriction boundary (CURB) that cannot be developed without voter approval.The latest proposed Adams Canyon development is “The wrong place at the wrong time,” said Mike Miller of Santa Paula, a leader of the Measure I effort. “Our community just went to the trenches on this thing and the citizens put into place what is responsible growth for Santa Paula. . .we’re just starting to revision for the community; we just started talking to each other and working together and it’s unfortunate this is happening.”Francisco Avila and Nancy Malvasio filed the notice of intent to circulate petitions and paid the $200 city fee on March 1, including the full text of the proposed initiative.The statement of reasons for seeking to change the CURB noted that one of the primary purposes of Measure I was to ensure public involvement in future development. Development of Adam’s Canyon, according to the statement, would cause economic “growth and vitality throughout our city by generating the expenditure of millions of dollars on goods and services annually. . .contribute to the infrastructure (schools, parks, libraries, transportation and utilities) to help all residents prosper through common improvements and by generating millions of dollars in revenue to the City of Santa Paula through impact fees. . .explore economic opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable. . .Adams Canyon will make hundreds of jobs available for city residents. . .”The statement of reasons also notes that reasonable housing needs would be met through development of Adams Canyon, as Santa Paula residents “will not be forced to choose between higher housing costs within the CURB or moving out of the city to areas where reasonable housing exists in their economic segments.”