Why don't council members get it?

I congratulate the Moorpark City Council for rejecting eminent domain, but it seems some city leaders still don't get it.

Before the vote on Sept. 19, I sent an email to council members pointing out that the city of Anaheim has spurred economic development without using eminent domain.

In a report released in June, Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle says, "Some urban infill advocates question if development can really occur without the government taking property through its eminent domain powers?

In Anaheim, my city council colleagues and I decided that we would not agree to any development plan that proposed the use of eminent domain. We believed strongly that any economic development needed to happen without the government violating the private property rights of our residents and business owners."

In response to my e-mail, Hugh Riley, assistant city manager, tried to argue, "This is Moorpark, not Anaheim. Developers are not standing in line to invest in our downtown area."

Well, the question is, why not? Maybe the city is standing in the way. Maybe Moorpark, like Anaheim, should rezone the area to allow easier development, take responsibility for clearing environmental impact statements, simplify the permitting process and reduce arcane building requirements. For example, it seems that High Street is ripe for mixed use development with residential housing over retail stores. But this might complicate the lives of our city's regulators.

Contrary to former City Councilmember Clint Harper, opponents are not "a bunch of uniformed sheep lead by a few demagogues" ("Eminent domain debate not over yet," Sept. 28). We do not need eminent domain used against home owners or small businesses. The free market can provide better development than the heavy hand of eminent domain. Give the present property owners an offer they can refuse, not one they can't refuse. Bruce K. Bell Moorpark