City Council Summary, October 3, 2005 Staff Report

Without an awards ceremony at the beginning or much business to conduct, the Oct. 3 meeting started at 6 p.m. and ended around 8. About a dozen residents attended the meeting.

A presentation on Measure M was given by Orange County Transportation Authority, represented by Richard Dixon (Lake Forest council member) and Dave Simpson (OCTA government relations).

Dixon repeatedly stated the presentation was to inform and not intended as advocacy for Measure M (half-cent sales tax passed in 1990 that expires in 2011). If anyone believes Dell, Budweiser and Pepsi pay millions of dollars to “inform” viewers during the Super Bowl, they would find Dixon’s presentation merely informative. If Measure M is to continue beyond 2011, OCTA must convince the Board of Supervisors (with Orange County’s 34 cities in support) to put it on the ballot in 2006.

At least one of Dixon’s comments hit home: Crown Valley Parkway is becoming Mission Viejo’s El Toro Road. Dixon rhetorically asked where Mission Viejo will get money to address such traffic problems. Council Member John Paul Ledesma later remarked about Dixon’s mention of a link between the 73 and 241 toll roads, which Ledesma has encouraged for several years. Council Member Gail Reavis is the city’s Measure M representative, a position for which she volunteers.

The only agenda item pulled by the public was the ordinance approving a zone change for the former Kmart property on Los Alisos Blvd. Mission Viejo resident Carl Schulthess spoke from the public microphone, recapping the Sept. 19 meeting when the council voted 4-0 in support of the project in Reavis’ absence. Schulthess said the council’s attitude toward the residents led to the creation of the Mission Viejo NewsBlog. Schulthess also quoted council members who ignored residents’ wishes and concerns on Sept. 19 to approve a developer’s housing project.

Council Member Reavis alone questioned the wisdom of approving UDR/Pacific’s housing project. She read her written questions submitted at the Sept. 19 meeting. Reavis cited the developer’s lack of answers and the city’s lack of solutions (e.g., the risks of an earthen dam above the housing project, how to keep affordable units from slipping back to market rate, the amount of fees the developer would pay) as reasons she couldn’t support the project’s approval.

Council Member Ledesma repeated his Sept. 19 performance by advocating for the developer, including answering questions that hadn’t been asked. Council Members MacLean and Ury added their support to Ledesma’s remarks. MacLean moved to approve the zone change and Ledesma seconded. The vote was 4-1 to approve with Reavis dissenting. During the council comments portion of the meeting after the vote, Ledesma continued arguing for the developer’s housing project.

Council Member Trish Kelley presented an agenda item regarding the city’s emergency preparedness. While the subject is timely following recent hurricanes, the city already has an employee who is paid more than $100K annually to perform the duties mentioned in Kelley’s recommendations. No staff member reminded Kelley of the employee. Because the item required no vote, the staff was directed to come back with a report. Perhaps in two weeks the staff will remember the city has such an employee and suggest an evaluation of what he’s done.