DEVELOPER 3 measures on Nov. ballot

But a large group of residents has fought the project every step of the way.

“It is really difficult to get a yes vote on any ballot campaign,” Manolatos said. “It’s exactly one of the reasons we don’t have (enough) housing.”

Opponents of the project say it’s an example of urban sprawl. It would place hundreds of homes, businesses, retail and recreational activities in one of the last areas of North County still used for commercial farming. The only access to the community would be from North River Road, which is already congested with commuters traveling between Oceanside and nearby Fallbrook.

Kathi Carbone, one of the leaders of the opposition, said the developer’s bigmoney campaign doesn’t

worry her.

“It doesn’t matter how much money the billionaire real estate developer has to spend,” Carbone said. “We know he pumps cash into his (campaign committee) whenever they get bad polling numbers back, which is often. We will still win this.”

Integral managing partner Craig Manchester and partner Lance Waite contributed $120,000 to the Yes on Measure L campaign on Aug. 13, according to a state Fair Political Practices Commission Form 497 filed with the Oceanside city clerk’s office.

The two partners made their next-largest contribution of $65,000 on Aug. 26, and documents show they paid out all the other cash in the Yes on L campaign coffers.

Any amount greater than $1,000 received within 90 days of the election requires the filing of a Form 497. The North River Farms team filed seven separate Form 497s in August.

Opponents of the project,

a grassroots group called Save Our Farmland, have raised their campaign money in contributions of mostly $100 to $250 from various individuals. The largest single donation they received through June was $500 and nothing since then has triggered the $1,000 reporting requirement.

Oceanside voters opposed to the project placed the referendum on the ballot after the City Council approved it on a 3-2 vote last fall. The defeat of Measure L would invalidate the council’s approval.

Integral has modified the project multiple times over several years as part of the planning process, generally in response to comments in city planning department reports and at public meetings. The number of homes was reduced, infrastructure improvements were added, and more acres were set aside as open space.

Still, nearly all of the company’s promotional materials emphasize the community farms, organic crops, open

space and recreation, with few details about the hundreds of homes to be built there or the traffic they would generate.

Integral has supported two lawsuits against opponents of the project. The first was filed by Barbara Hazlett, president of the Republican Club of Ocean Hills, and claimed that the signatures collected for the referendum were falsified, a potential felony.

Superior Court Judge Gregory Pollack ruled Aug. 21 that there was no evidence of fraud and stated “This court refuses to engage in the fanciful speculation and conjecture necessary to conclude that (the project’s opponents) engaged in forgery ... or other chicanery.”

Though Integral did not file the suit, it issued a news release at the time in support of Hazlett and calling for a “prompt judicial review” of the signature-gathering effort.”

The judge, in his ruling Aug. 21, noted the opponents’ contentions that Hazlett

was a “shill” for the developer, and that she used the same law firm as the developer.

“While the court certainly has suspicions that the developer is behind this case,” Pollack said, there was no admissible evidence of that. As a result, Hazlett is liable to pay the attorney’s fees and costs for the case.

Asked about the judge’s ruling, Hazlett said Wednesday by email that the lawsuit “speaks for itself.”

“While I am disappointed in the ruling, I continue to believe that North River Farms will be a great benefit to the City of Oceanside,” she said, adding that she intends to vote for Measure L.

Integral filed a separate lawsuit as The NRF Project Owner LLC on July 17, claiming the referendum violates the company’s right to build housing. Like the Hazlett suit, it names the city of Oceanside, the city clerk, the county registrar of voters and referendum proponents, including Carbone and resident Arleen Hammerschmidt

as respondents. That suit is unlikely to be resolved until after the election.

Carbone said Integral is trying to bully residents with its money and attorneys.

“The people of Oceanside are starting to wake up and understand that a billionaire that falsely accuses citizens of a felony may also be at least misleading, and likely downright deceptive, with their advertising,” she said.

“We don’t need millions of dollars,” Carbone said. “We have the people of Oceanside backing us up. We are trustworthy and honest. We will stand up, and we will speak out. We will distribute literature, and we will educate. We will not be bullied.”

Oceanside voters will have three measures on their November ballot. The other two are Measure K, which would establish term limits for the mayor and City Council members; and Measure M, which would allow a tax on cannabis businesses.

philip.diehl@sduniontribune.com